MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002376096 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.13798

FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING PARALLEL FLIPPED CLASSROOMS

2019· article· en· W3002376096 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ioana Rontu, Mohammed Moshirpour, Sepideh Afkhami Goli, Fatemeh Sharifi, Ehsan Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlipped classroomComputer scienceConceptual frameworkCourse (navigation)Learning stylesMathematics educationQualitative researchKnowledge managementMedical educationPsychologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in information technology has given rise to a new flipped learning environment that is increasingly used at post-secondary institutions. This new pedagogical approach provides a personalized learning experience by accommodating different students’ learning styles. Students interact with the course material prior to attending scheduled face-to-face instruction, where learning is reinforced by working through examples and application problems. This paper provides a practical guiding framework for the collaboration and coordination of multiple instructors in a flipped delivery course style, based upon a literature review, qualitative research, and experience. We used a qualitative approach using a questionnaire to gather lessons learned and suggestions from instructors. The responses were analyzed to extract common themes which were mapped to create a conceptual framework for successful multi-instructor flipped course delivery. Recommendations are made as per three chronological sequences of before, during and after the course offering. The framework aims to support the planning, implementation and evaluation stages of organizing and managing a multi-instructor flipped course. This paper stresses the importance of the teaching team proactively completing the planning and design of course components before the start of the course. Quantitative student feedback received from the fall 2018 course offering in Schulich School of Engineering at the University of Calgary is used to support the flipped classroom delivery, multi-instructor delivery style.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicInnovative Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207