Flipping classroom in online courses for working professionals: Challenges and opportunities for student engagement

Samoilova, Evgenia

[img] PDF
ipsds_flipping_classroom_in_online_courses_for_working_professionals-_challenges_and_opportunities_for_student_engagement_0-n.pdf - Published

Download (3MB)

URL: https://madoc.bib.uni-mannheim.de/59076
Additional URL: https://survey-data-science.net/sites/default/file...
URN: urn:nbn:de:bsz:180-madoc-590765
Document Type: Report
Year of publication: 2017
The title of a journal, publication series: IPSDS Assessment Report
Volume: 2
Place of publication: Mannheim
Publishing house: Universität Mannheim
Publication language: English
Institution: School of Social Sciences > Statistik u. Sozialwissenschaftliche Methodenlehre (Kreuter 2014-2020)
Pre-existing license: Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share Alike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Subject: 300 Social sciences, sociology, anthropology
310 Statistics
Abstract: Until now meta-­analysis studies failed to establish significant differences in outcomes between online and traditional classroom learning (Means, Bakia, & Murphy, 2014). Given different purposes, target groups and contexts of use of these two formats, their general comparison is hardly beneficial for further development of the field. Hence, some authors argued for shifting the focus of online learning research to identifying strengths and weaknesses of various online and blended-­learning designs given specific objectives, learners and contexts (Fishman & Dede, 2015). In the recent years, the flipped classroom design (also referred to as “inverted instruction” or “inverted classroom”) attracted quite a lot of attention among researchers and practitioners alike (Prober & Khan, 2013). Although there is still some disagreement on what exactly constitutes the flipped classroom (FC), the common denominator of the definition suggests that FB includes rotation between two components: (pre-­class) students’ interaction with course materials and the actual in-­class interaction (He et al., 2016). The “flipping” in this case stands for substituting traditional in-­class lecturing with guided interaction, since lecturing can be done outside of the class for example via providing students with pre-­recorded video lectures (Lage, Platt, & Treglia, 2000). Flexibility and engagement are often key variables of interest in FC research (Poon, 2017; Thai, Wever & Walcke, 2017; Hew, 2016). Advantages of flexibility are quite straight forward. When learning materials are offered online and asynchronously, students can engage with the material at any time, at their own pace, and regardless of their location. The aspect of engagement on the other hand requires a more detailed elaboration. Although engagement is often defined in different ways (see Ainley, 2012; Skinner & Pitzer, 2012), this concept is primarily used to refer to one’s interactions with the learning environment (Järvelä & Renninger, 2014). Engagement literature also agrees on differentiating between behavioral, emotional, and cognitive types of engagement (Fredricks et al., 2004). Although FC design is expected to be more engaging due to increased flexibility and possibility of self-­paced mastery (e.g. watching video-­lectures at one’s own pace), components of the FC design varyin a number of ways with different implications for student engagement. In addition, recent critique of online learning supporting (instead of overcoming) education disparities (Hansen & Reich, 2015;; He et al., 2016), suggests that attaining a desired level of engagement across various subpopulations of online learners is a difficult task. Against this background, understanding the learners, constantly evaluating and tailoring courses accordingly is highly important. This report describes implementation of FC for an international online program (International Program in Survey and Data Science (IPSDS)) designed for working professional in the field of survey and data science. It is structured in five sections. The following section describes relevant characteristics of IPSDS students. Section three discusses main featured of the implemented design and evaluation strategies used to guide further development and change. Sections four presents evaluation results based on the three qualitative intervention studies. Conclusion summarizes the key findings and limitations.

Dieser Eintrag ist Teil der Universitätsbibliographie.

Das Dokument wird vom Publikationsserver der Universitätsbibliothek Mannheim bereitgestellt.

Metadata export


+ Search Authors in

+ Download Statistics

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

You have found an error? Please let us know about your desired correction here: E-Mail

Actions (login required)

Show item Show item