MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2599899714 · doi:10.18260/1-2--23140

The Effect of the Inverted Classroom Teaching Approach on Student/Faculty Interaction and Students’ Self-Efficacy

2020· article· en· W2599899714 sur OpenAlexaff
Micah Stickel, Siddarth Hari, Liu Q

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueInnovative Teaching Methods
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésClass (philosophy)Flipped classroomMathematics educationActive learning (machine learning)Computer scienceTeaching methodPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract The Effect of the Inverted Classroom Teaching Approach on Student/Faculty Interaction and Students’ Self-Efficacy Research PaperThe inverted or flipped classroom approach provides students with the opportunity to develop abasic understanding of core concepts through the online delivery of short pre-lecture videos.This in turn, enables the course instructor to make us of the in-class time more effectively bycreating an active learning environment. This approach has been used to teach an electric andmagnetic fields physics course as part of the second-year electrical and computer engineeringcurriculum at a large research-intensive engineering school. The teaching approach consisted of(a) pre-class lesson videos with embedded viewing quizzes (average length of 25 minutes), and(b) in-class active learning opportunities, including conceptual questions and peer instructionfacilitated through a classroom-response system, group work exercises, and opportunities forindividual work and review of the material at hand.As part of the two-year study associated with this new initiative, one of the key researchquestions was: Does the new teaching approach improve the students’ perception ofstudent/instructor interaction and the students’ self-efficacy as compared to the traditionalinstructor-centered approach? To assess this, a mixed-methods design was used whichincluded, in part, an end-of-course survey and follow-up focus group sessions. The studyinvolved teaching the course in a traditional lecture format in one year, and then with theinverted classroom technique the next year. The same instructor taught the course in both years,and approximately 330 students took the course each year. The same survey and focus groupprotocols were used for the inverted classroom cohort (number of survey respondents = 186) ashad been used the previous year for the traditional lecturing cohort (number of surveyrespondents = 178).It was found that overall, students from the inverted classroom cohort had higher satisfactionratings for the level of their interaction with the instructor during class (mean=3.92 versus 3.58, p< .001, on a scale of 5, with “strongly dissatisfied” being 1 and “strong satisfied” being 5). Aswell, 70% of students in the inverted course versus 51% of the students in the traditional courseexpressed satisfaction with this type of interaction. Students in the inverted class also reportedthat they interacted with the instructor during class more often than the traditionally-taughtstudents (mean = 2.61 versus 1.86, p < .001, on a 6-point scale with “never” being 1 and “morethan once a week” being 6). Particularly, 25% of the inverted-class students versus 54% of thetraditionally-taught students reported that they had never interacted with the instructor duringclass. These survey findings have been confirmed by the comments from the student focusgroup sessions.The students’ self-efficacy survey questions were based on the well-known LAESE(Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-Efficacy) instrument. Factor analysis has shownthat the 31 items on the self-efficacy survey were significantly loaded on three factors: (a)Ability to learn the course material, (b) Ability to explain the fundamental course concepts toothers, and (c) the Ability to succeed in engineering. For all three factors, students in bothcohorts expressed high levels of self-efficacy, and there were no significant differences betweenthe mean values observed for both cohorts. Students in the inverted cohort had the mostconfidence in their ability to learn the material in the course (mean = 5.24, on a scale of 7) andhad the least confidence in their ability to explain the course concepts to one of their peers (mean= 4.42, on a scale of 7).As this new teaching approach becomes more widespread, it is important to ensure that thistechnique improves all aspects of the student learning experience. The results from this initialstudy indicate that improvements can be made to the students’ perception and satisfaction withstudent/faculty interaction, while no significant impact was found with course-specific andengineering self-efficacy of the students. Future offerings of this course with this approach willincorporate more specific efforts to leverage the opportunity of the inverted classroom to developstudents’ self-motivation for learning and engagement with the material. In this way we wouldhope to see an improvement in the students’ course-related self-efficacy.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,022

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,057
Tête enseignante GPT0,422
Écart entre enseignants0,365 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations13
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetInnovative Teaching MethodsTravaux en français237 207