Salt Lake City, Utah
June 23, 2018
June 23, 2018
July 27, 2018
Inquiry-based learning is vital to the engineering design process, and most crucially in the laboratory and hands-on settings. Through the model of inquiry-based design, student teams are able to formulate critical inputs to the design process and develop a stronger and more relevant understanding of theoretical principles and their applications. In the junior-level Biotransport laboratory course at XXX, the curriculum utilizes the engineering design process to guide students through three (3) different modules covering different biotransport phenomena (diffusivity, mass transport, and heat transfer). Students are required to research, conceptualize, and generate hypothesis around a module prompt. Students design, execute, and analyze their own experimental setups to test the hypotheses within an autodidactic peer-learning structure. The iterative design process is critical to successful completion of the module.
Previously, we have demonstrated increased student engagement outside of the class period and improved student to instructor ratio. In this current work, we present multi-year data on the impact of introducing a flipped lecture into the lab and the resulting impact on student learning, collaboration, and overall performance in the course.
A multi-year study was completed spanning from 2014 to 2016, assessing students’ end of course evaluations. The integration of the flipped lecture into the lab was first implemented in 2015 (prior to 2015, the flipped lecture was a stand-alone course offered outside of the lab sections), so the data presented here offers a comparison of student evaluations between the two course structures. Per the response rates, the sample size for each year was: n=81 (2016); n=60 (2015); n=48 (2014). The surveys were anonymous and a host of questions related to overall course satisfaction, structure, and content were asked. The data was assessed and compared across the 3 years.
Analysis of the data showed a consistent increase in overall student satisfaction with the course as the new structure was implemented. The percent of students giving a satisfactory rating or higher for the 2014, 2015 and 2016 course offerings was 79%, 89%, 92%, respectively. This shows a significant difference between 2014 responses compared with 2015 and 2016. Examples of questions related to teaching methods and skill development are given below:
1. This course gives me skills and techniques directly applicable to my career 2. In this course, many methods are used to involve me in learning 3. Assignments are pertinent to topics presented in class 4. Lab experiences assist me in learning concepts 5. This course demonstrates how to apply concepts and methodologies
Comparing data from pre-integration of the flipped lecture into the lab (2014) and after two years of integration (2016) showed a significant increase across all questions. Analysis of student responses to the five outcomes listed above showed an average of a 7.8% increase in 2016 of students agreeing with the statements.
In conclusion, the integration of a flipped lecture into the lab successfully improved student performance and understanding of course material and had a positive impact on student skill-acquisition. This format also improved the delivery of content to students as assessed by maintaining pertinence to the lab topics and clear understanding of the learning concepts.
Aboelzahab, A. F., & Kinzer-Ursem, T. L. (2018, June), The Impact of Integrating a Flipped Lecture in a Biotransport Laboratory Course on Student Learning and Engagement Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--31109
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