Salt Lake City, Utah
June 23, 2018
June 23, 2018
July 27, 2018
Engineering Leadership Development
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of an engineering leadership development course under two formats: regular lecture and a flipped classroom. Flipped classrooms are designed to incorporate cognitivist and constructivist learning strategies into the classroom environment. Cognitivist-learning strategies build knowledge through internal processing of information while constructivist-learning strategies build knowledge through experiences. The objective of this study was to determine if a flipped classroom is associated with an increase in student self-rating of professional and leadership skills and perceived learning outcomes. Pre- and post-course survey data were collected in an engineering leadership principles course across nine semesters. The first five semesters (n=170) were structured as standard courses with lecture material and in-class activities, a cognitivist approach. The final four semesters (n=152) were structured with a flipped classroom approach. Students accessed course material through weekly online modules and class time was spent in reflective discussion and experiences based on the material offered online, a constructivist approach. The survey included 55 items that covered seven sub-scales: understanding of ethical issues, global awareness (world view), communication skills, organization/leadership skills, self-knowledge, creativity, and teamwork. Only student paired (pre and post) data were used in the analyses in this study. Most survey items had a significant increase from pre to post course survey response in the desired direction. To evaluate whether differences exist between the standard classroom and the flipped classroom, difference scores were calculated for each individual and a Mann-Whitney test, for group differences, was performed on the difference score with males and females combined and within each gender separately. Two items showed significantly higher difference scores in the standard classroom: ‘I can explain at least one ethical framework’ (p=0.038) and ‘I can apply a professional code of ethics to analyze an ethical problem’ (p=0.0003). The second item was also significant in the male and female individual analyses. In females, two survey items indicated significantly higher difference scores in the flipped classroom: ‘I am confident taking on leadership roles on projects’ (p=0.052) and ‘I understand my leadership style’ (p=0.018). These differences may be reflected in the differences between knowledge and emotional domains. Explaining and applying ethical frameworks are more in line with a knowledge domain, associated with cognitivist learning theories, whereas being confident in one’s leadership ability and understanding one’s own leadership style may be more related to emotional domains and a result of the constructivist approach to learning through the flipped classroom approach. Several additional trends were noted in the female difference score data that may be more evident with increased statistical power. Preliminary data indicate that the revised flipped classroom may be more effective than the standard classroom in developing student’s emotional intelligence.
Lang, D. H., & Handley, M., & Erdman, A. M. (2018, June), Flipped Classroom and Emotional Learning in an Engineering Leadership Development Course Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--30524
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: © 2018 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