Asee peer logo

Barriers to Learning in a Large Flipped Biotransport Course

Download Paper |


2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition


Columbus, Ohio

Publication Date

June 24, 2017

Start Date

June 24, 2017

End Date

June 28, 2017

Conference Session

Assessment of Student Learning and Motivation in BME

Tagged Division


Page Count




Permanent URL

Download Count


Request a correction

Paper Authors


Brian P. Helmke University of Virginia

visit author page

Brian Helmke is currently Associate Professor of Biomedical Engineering at the University of Virginia. He received the B.S.E. in bioengineering from the University of Pennsylvania, the B.S.Econ. from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and the Ph.D. in bioengineering from the University of California, San Diego. Brian’s research interests include cardiovascular physiology, cellular mechanobiology, and nanotechnology-based biomaterials. He is also interested in technology-enhanced teaching and in experiential learning for undergraduates in science and engineering.

visit author page

Download Paper |


Instructors often cite anecdotal case evidence that an active learning or flipped classroom approach increases the level of student engagement and gives students guided practice applying concepts. However, research into the effectiveness of achieving learning goals is lacking, and student perceptions of their own learning effectiveness has not been studied.

In this study, a flipped classroom approach was implemented in a third-year required biotransport course with enrollment of 94 students. Content was delivered electronically to students outside of class so that they could introduce themselves to key concepts and practice simple applications. In class, students solved quantitative and conceptual problems with an emphasis on synthesis and integration of ideas. Qualitative assessment tools were administered several times during the semester to probe student perceptions of the class activities and how each activity affected their learning. Assessments included anonymous surveys, reflection questions, recording of in-class student activities by an impartial third-party observer, and focus groups of students conducted by impartial third-party researchers.

Mid-semester student surveys (Likert scale or common response groupings) indicated that students who objected to the pedagogical design of the course were more adamant in their opinions that those who found the flipped classroom model helpful to their own learning. In focus groups held after mid-semester with 20% of students participating, students demonstrated awareness of both internal and external factors that contributed to their criticism of the flipped classroom model. Based on these results, detailed coding is in progress of student resistance to the flipped classroom model using the three categories of Seidel and Tanner (CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 12: 586-595, 2013).

Implementing a flipped classroom model in a large biotransport class presented challenges associated with complexity and novelty of content, design of activities for group work in class, and student resistance to a non-traditional classroom style. Despite demonstrating success on traditional summative assessments, analysis of student perceptions revealed that both social and extrinsic factors created unexpected barriers to learning that led to some aspects of student resistance. Thus, this study suggests that flipped classroom course design must consider extrinsic factors that create barriers to learning.

Helmke, B. P. (2017, June), Barriers to Learning in a Large Flipped Biotransport Course Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--27649

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2017 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015