Perception of Engineering Students on Remote Teaching with the Flipped-Classroom Strategy

Said Pertuz | Bio
Universidad Industrial de Santander
Share:

Abstract

This text reports the results of a perception study of the students of remote teaching of the flipped-classroom method in comparison to two strategies of regular face-to-face teaching: classic elñcturing and learning based on projects. The perceptions study follows a cohort design where the students have the chance of experimenting the different pedagogic strategies in a sequence and perform an assessment at the course’s end. The perception evaluation takes into account six criteria: comprehension, theoretical concepts appropriation, disciplinary formation, integral formation, dedication and academic burden, interaction among the subjects of the process and active learning. In a pilot study with 36 students of an engineering undergraduate program, remote teaching through flipped classrooms is always better or equally valued than those face-to-face strategies in all the considered criteria.

References

[1] E. A. Tokareva, Y. V. Smirnova, and L. G. Orchakova, “Innovation and communication technologies: Analysis of the effectiveness of their use and implementation in higher education,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 3219–3234, 2019. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-019-09922-2.

[2] B. Moges Alemu, “Integrating ICT into Teaching-learning Practices: Promise, Challenges and Future Directions of Higher Educational Institutes,” Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 170–189, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1056082.

[3] B. Kerr, “The flipped classroom in engineering education: A survey of the research,” in 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 2015, pp. 815–818. DOI: 10.1109/ICL.2015.7318133.

[4] S. Bell, “Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future,” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 39–43, 2010. DOI: 10.1080/00098650903505415.

[5] B. Warin, O. Talbi, C. Kolski, and F. Hoogstoel, “Multi-role project (MRP): A new project-based learning method for STEM,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 137–146, 2016. DOI: 10.1109/TE.2015.2462809.

[6] P. Charlton and K. Avramides, “Knowledge construction in computer science and engineering when learning through making,” IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 379–390, 2016. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2016.2627567.

[7] J. L. Bishop and M. A. Verleger, “The flipped classroom: a survey of the research,” in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2013. [online]. Available: https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/20/papers/6219/download

[8] Consejo Superior, Proyecto Institucional. Acuerdo No.026 de 2018. Universidad Industrial de Santander, 2018

[9] Y. Kim and C. Ahn, “Effect of Combined Use of Flipped Learning and Inquiry-Based Learning on a System Modeling and Control Course,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 136–142, 2018. 10.1109/TE.2017.2774194.

[10] A. Singh, S. Rocke, A. Pooransingh, and C. J. Ramlal, “Improving Student Engagement in Teaching Electric Machines through Blended Learning,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 297–304, 2019. DOI: 10.1109/TE.2019.2918097.

[11] K. Yelamarthi and E. Drake, “A flipped first-year digital circuits course for engineering and technology students,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 179–186, 2015. DOI: 10.1109/TE.2014.2356174.

[12] F. N. Leite, E. Shigueo Hoji, and H. Abdalla Junior, “A Blended Learning Method Applied in Data Communication and Computer Networks Subject,” IEEE Latin America Transactions, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 163–171, 2018. DOI: 10.1109/TLA.2018.8291469.

[13] S. Pertuz, J. Torres, “Lineamientos para el diseño de Cursos Online Masivos y Abiertos (MOOC) en Ingeniería Electrónica,” Entre Ciencia e Ingeniería, vol. 11, no. 21, pp. 42–49, 2017. DOI: 10.31908/19098367.3276.

[14] S. Pertuz and J. Torres, “The impact of MOOCs on the performance of undergraduate students in digital signal processing,” in Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision, Bucaramanga, aug 2016, pp. 1–7. DOI: 10.1109/STSIVA.2016.7743356.

[15] P. J. Guo, J. Kim, and R. Rubin, “How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos,” in Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Learning at Scale. New York, New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2014, pp. 41–50. DOI: 10.1145/2556325.2566239.

[16] A. Drummond, Y. Lu, S. Chaudhuri, C. Jermaine, J. Warren, and S. Rixner, “Learning to grade student programs in a massive open online course,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, 2014, pp. 785–790. DOI: 10.1109/ICDM.2014.142.

[17] X. Su, T. Wang, J. Qiu, and L. Zhao, “Motivating students with new mechanisms of online assignments and examination to meet the mooc challenges for programming,” in 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2015, pp. 1–6. DOI: 10.1109/FIE.2015.7344337.

[18] R. C. Hill and Y. Parvini, “Automated grading with a software-checking program in the system dynamics and control curriculum,” in 2018 Annual American Control Conference (ACC), 2018, pp. 345–351. DOI: 10.23919/ACC.2018.8431462.

[19] J. C. F. De Winter and D. Dodou, “Five-point likert items: t-test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon,” Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, p. 11, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ933690
How to Cite
Pertuz, S. (2021). Perception of Engineering Students on Remote Teaching with the Flipped-Classroom Strategy. Revista Ingenierías Universidad De Medellín, 20(39), 231-250. https://doi.org/10.22395/rium.v20n39a13

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Send mail to Author


Send Cancel

We are indexed in