Effectiveness of flip teaching on engineering students' performance in the physics lab

[EN] The progressive introduction of the flip teaching (FT) instructional model into higher education has accelerated in recent years. The FT methodology seems to be especially suitable for laboratory practice sessions: before the lab session the students are given documents and videos that explain the theoretical contents and the experimental procedure. When this material is studied in advance, the practice session can be devoted to the discussion, clarification and practical application of the acquired knowledge. This paper describes the effect of the FT methodology on the students¿ academic performance when it was applied to the laboratory practice in two subjects, Physics and Electricity, of a technical degree. The laboratory and final grades of these subjects were compared in four consecutive years. The characteristics of all four years were quite similar, except that the traditional teaching method (TM) was used in two, while FT was applied in the other two. The statistical analysis shows that the academic results of the students were better in both subjects under FT than those obtained using TM, and that the difference was statistically significant.This work was supported by the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia [Project PIME/2018/B25 Convocatoria de Proyectos de Innovacion y Convergencia de la UPV].Gómez-Tejedor, J.; Vidaurre, A.; Tort-Ausina, I.; Molina Mateo, J.; Serrano, M.; Meseguer Dueñas, JM.; Martínez Sala, RM.... (2020). Effectiveness of flip teaching on engineering students' performance in the physics lab. Computers & Education. 144:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103708111144Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334-345. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021Ardid, M., Gómez-Tejedor, J. A., Meseguer-Dueñas, J. M., Riera, J., & Vidaurre, A. (2015). Online exams for blended assessment. Study of different application methodologies. Computers & Education, 81, 296-303. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.010Aşıksoy, G., & Özdamlı, F. (2016). Flipped Classroom adapted to the ARCS Model of Motivation and applied to a Physics Course. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(6). doi:10.12973/eurasia.2016.1251aBaepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227-236. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006Bao, L. (2006). Theoretical comparisons of average normalized gain calculations. American Journal of Physics, 74(10), 917-922. doi:10.1119/1.2213632Chang, S.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. (2018). Impacts of an augmented reality-based flipped learning guiding approach on students’ scientific project performance and perceptions. Computers & Education, 125, 226-239. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.007Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, & Chen, N.-S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16-27. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.004Coletta, V. P., & Phillips, J. A. (2005). Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability. American Journal of Physics, 73(12), 1172-1182. doi:10.1119/1.2117109Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class. Science, 332(6031), 862-864. doi:10.1126/science.1201783Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2013). Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: Two case studies. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 24-28. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.001Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74. doi:10.1119/1.18809Hung, H.-T. (2014). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96. doi:10.1080/09588221.2014.967701Hung, M.-L., & Chou, C. (2015). Students’ perceptions of instructors’ roles in blended and online learning environments: A comparative study. Computers & Education, 81, 315-325. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.022Jensen, J. L., Holt, E. A., Sowards, J. B., Heath Ogden, T., & West, R. E. (2018). Investigating Strategies for Pre-Class Content Learning in a Flipped Classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 523-535. doi:10.1007/s10956-018-9740-6Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. d. M. (2015). Improvements from a Flipped Classroom May Simply Be the Fruits of Active Learning. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(1), ar5. doi:10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129Jovanovic, J., Mirriahi, N., Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Pardo, A. (2019). Predictive power of regularity of pre-class activities in a flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 134, 156-168. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.011Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009Kong, S. C. (2015). An experience of a three-year study on the development of critical thinking skills in flipped secondary classrooms with pedagogical and technological support. Computers & Education, 89, 16-31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.017Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43. doi:10.1080/00220480009596759Lo, C. K., Lie, C. W., & Hew, K. F. (2018). Applying «First Principles of Instruction» as a design theory of the flipped classroom: Findings from a collective study of four secondary school subjects. Computers & Education, 118, 150-165. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.003Marx, J. D., & Cummings, K. (2007). Normalized change. American Journal of Physics, 75(1), 87-91. doi:10.1119/1.2372468Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59. doi:10.1007/bf02505024Missildine, K., Fountain, R., Summers, L., & Gosselin, K. (2013). Flipping the Classroom to Improve Student Performance and Satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(10), 597-599. doi:10.3928/01484834-20130919-03Nissen, J. M., Talbot, R. M., Nasim Thompson, A., & Van Dusen, B. (2018). Comparison of normalized gain and Cohen’sdfor analyzing gains on concept inventories. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(1). doi:10.1103/physrevphyseducres.14.010115Nouri, J. (2016). The flipped classroom: for active, effective and increased learning – especially for low achievers. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1). doi:10.1186/s41239-016-0032-zO’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002Pierce, R., & Fox, J. (2012). Vodcasts and Active-Learning Exercises in a «Flipped Classroom» Model of a Renal Pharmacotherapy Module. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(10), 196. doi:10.5688/ajpe7610196Rienties, B., Kaper, W., Struyven, K., Tempelaar, D., van Gastel, L., Vrancken, S., … Virgailaitė-Mečkauskaitė, E. (2011). A review of the role of information communication technology and course design in transitional education practices. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(6), 563-581. doi:10.1080/10494820.2010.542757Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84. doi:10.1016/j.iree.2014.08.003Şengel, E. (2016). To FLIP or not to FLIP: Comparative case study in higher education in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 547-555. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.034Sun, Z., Xie, K., & Anderman, L. H. (2018). The role of self-regulated learning in students’ success in flipped undergraduate math courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 36, 41-53. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.09.003Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best «blend» of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, 113-126. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003Tomas, L., Evans, N. (Snowy), Doyle, T., & Skamp, K. (2019). Are first year students ready for a flipped classroom? A case for a flipped learning continuum. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1). doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0135-4Von Korff, J., Archibeque, B., Gomez, K. A., Heckendorf, T., McKagan, S. B., Sayre, E. C., … Sorell, L. (2016). Secondary analysis of teaching methods in introductory physics: A 50 k-student study. American Journal of Physics, 84(12), 969-974. doi:10.1119/1.4964354Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 17-28. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.01.002Willoughby, S. D., & Metz, A. (2009). Exploring gender differences with different gain calculations in astronomy and biology. American Journal of Physics, 77(7), 651-657. doi:10.1119/1.3133087Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317-331. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.00