June 14, 2015
June 14, 2015
June 17, 2015
26.1099.1 - 26.1099.20
Persistence, Achievement and Attitudinal Assessment of a Flipped Biomedical Engineering Classroom using Pencasts and Muddiest Point Web-enabled ToolsStudies show that student-centered instruction can be more effective than teacher-centered.Here, we investigated achievement, persistence, and attitude regarding several student-centeredstrategies in a one-credit, large-scale, statistics and design of experiment course for upper-division biomedical engineering (BME) undergraduates. More specifically, we asked “What isthe effect of the flipped classroom, pencasts/online lectures, cyber-based muddiest point (unclearconcept) collection, and group-based activities on attitude, achievement, and persistence?”Two components comprised the course. Prior to class, students watched pencasts, submitted themuddiest and most interesting points online, and completed practice problems. In class, studentsengaged in a review of the muddiest/most unclear points in class and then applied lecturematerial through group activities including statistical software-oriented problem solving sessionsand design projects with the support of undergraduate teaching assistants and the instructor.To evaluate these student-centered strategies, three aspects were considered: persistence,attitude, and achievement. Persistence was measured as the number of students present duringthe second week of class and remaining at the final. To measure student value and attitude, twovalidated, custom surveys were administered in the middle (M) and at the end of the semester (E)anonymously: 1) the Student Value Survey on Muddiest Points (SVM) which focused on interestand usefulness as well as cost (emotion, time, effort) related to muddiest point collection and 2)the BME Student-centered Strategies (BSS) Survey regarding the flipped classroom, pencasts,muddiest points, and group activities. Lastly, a ten-question concept quiz was created andpiloted to assess achievement related to key statistical and design of experiment concepts.Persistence tracked for two semesters showed a value of 99%. Student attitude surveyscompleted during the same time frame also showed positive outcomes, supporting the notion ofhigh self-efficacy. Briefly, with respect to the SVM, the majority of students [nmid=100 students(M), nend=91 students (E)] agreed with statements concerning value (91% M, 94% E), interest(64% M, 66% E), and cost (82% M, 85% E). According to the BSS survey, all engagementstrategies were favorable with pencasts having the highest mean (4.6/5 Fall 2014 and 3.6/4Spring 2014, ~40 students each semester) and the flipped classroom having the lowest mean(3.4/5 Fall 2014 and 2.8/4 Spring 2014). In terms of achievement, end-of-semester pilot data ofthe concept quiz yielded a mean of 75% (Spring 2014). Currently, the concept test is beingadministered pre- and post-semester and will be used to determine semester gains. Pre-semesterscores averaged 44%, showing a large margin for improvement (Fall 2014).In general, this multi-faceted, integrated assessment approach focusing on persistence,attitudinal, and achievement supported this unique instructional paradigm as an effectivepedagogy for teaching and learning in the flipped classroom. Further, this work demonstratesthat longitudinal tracking is an effective means for continuous improvement of course contentand pedagogy.
Ankeny, C. J., & Krause, S. J. (2015, June), Longitudinal Assessment of Student Persistence, Achievement, and Attitude in a Flipped Biomedical Engineering Classroom Using Pencasts and Muddiest Point Web-enabled Tools Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.24436
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: © 2015 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