Lape, N. K., & Levy, R., & Yong, D. H., & Haushalter, K. A., & Eddy, R., & Hankel, N. (2014, June), Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics  Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--22939

\bibitem{asee_peer_22939}
  Lape, N. K., \& Levy, R., \& Yong, D. H., \& Haushalter, K. A., \& Eddy, R., \& Hankel, N. (2014, June), \emph{Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics}
  Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana.
  10.18260/1-2--22939

Nancy K. Lape, Rachel Levy, Darryl H. Yong, Karl A. Haushalter, Rebecca Eddy, and Nancy Hankel.  "Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics".  2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2014.  https://peer.asee.org/22939 Internet.  21 Jan, 2025

\bibitem{asee_peer_22939}
  Nancy K. Lape, Rachel Levy, Darryl H. Yong, Karl A. Haushalter, Rebecca Eddy, and Nancy Hankel.
  "Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics".
  \emph{2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2014.
  https://peer.asee.org/22939 Internet.  21 Jan, 2025

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_22939
author = "Nancy K. Lape, Rachel Levy, Darryl H. Yong, Karl A. Haushalter, Rebecca Eddy, and Nancy Hankel"
title = "Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics"
booktitle = "2014 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2014"
month = "June"
address = "Indianapolis, Indiana"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/22939}
number = {10.18260/1-2--22939}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -  Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and MathematicsMotivation and Background:An inverted classroom reverses the paradigm of traditional lecture courses by deliveringlectures outside of class – by means such as videos or screencasts – and using classmeeting time for instructor-mediated active learning. This format has the potential totransform STEM education by increasing student time spent on what research hasdemonstrated to be the most effective teaching techniques (i.e. active learning) withoutsacrificing material coverage or educational scaffolding. Many educators are beginning toinvert their classrooms, but there is limited (or no) data on learning gains currentlyavailable. We are rigorously examining the impact of four instructors inverting twoSTEM courses, in engineering and mathematics, by measuring student learning gains.Our expected measureable outcomes are:       1. Higher learning gains;       2. Increased ability to apply material in new situations (transfer);       3. Increased interest in and positive attitudes towards STEM fields (affective          gains); and       4. Increased awareness by students of how they learn and strategies that support          their learning (metacognitive gains).Our hypothesis is that increased student learning will arise primarily because of theadditional time that students will have with instructors actively working on meaningfultasks in class. If our hypotheses prove true, that will have implications for institutions thatare seeking to push more instruction online, where instructor-mediated learning islimited. In addition, because this study involves three different disciplines, the resultsshould be applicable across STEM fields and institutions.Methodology:The proposed study design is composed of three components: (1) direct assessmentmeasures specific to each of our courses/disciplines in addition to indirect assessmentmeasures; (2) comparison of control and experimental sections offered simultaneously (toreduce student demographic variability) using the same instructor (to limit instructorbias); and (3) direct assessment of learning gains and application both within the courseand in downstream courses to determine if learning gains persist.Results:The pilot year of the study showed no differences in student learning outcomes, transfer,or metacognitive skills between the control and inverted sections in either the engineeringcourse or the mathematics course. Overall, students in inverted sections felt lessenthusiastic towards STEM fields and less prepared for the next level of study; however,the effect was stronger in the engineering course.Conclusions and Significance:These preliminary results suggest that the inverted format may not improve studentlearning as compared to an active-learning-based course format. Given the faculty effortrequired to implement inverted classrooms and the potential decrease in student interestin the course field, a more “traditional” active learning format may be a better mode ofinstruction. However, these results are preliminary and based on a relatively smallnumber of students (n = 196 in the mathematics course and n= 59 in the engineeringcourse). Furthermore, the instructors have made changes to the inverted course format toaddress perceived weaknesses in the pilot year implementation.[Results and Conclusions will be modified to include Fall 2013 results for the paper andpresentation as feasible.]ERM Paper type: Research (or Evidence-based practice)
AU  - Nancy K. Lape
AU  - Rachel Levy
AU  - Darryl H. Yong
AU  - Karl A. Haushalter
AU  - Rebecca Eddy
AU  - Nancy Hankel
CY  - Indianapolis, Indiana
DA  - 2014/06/15
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Probing the Inverted Classroom: A Controlled Study of Teaching and Learning Outcomes in Undergraduate Engineering and Mathematics
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/22939
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--22939
ER  -