The Inverted Classroom in a First-Year Engineering Course

• Published in: Association for Engineering Education - Engineering Library Division Papers p. 23.1220.1
• Main Authors: Morin, Brooke, Kecskemety, Krista M, Harper, Kathleen A, Clingan, Paul Alan
• Format: Conference Proceeding
• Language: English
• Published: Atlanta American Society for Engineering Education-ASEE 23.06.2013
• Subjects: Blooms taxonomy; Classrooms; Colleges & universities; Curricula; Data analysis; Engineering; Engineering education; Ethical standards; Flipped classroom; Laboratories; Learning; Lifelong learning; On-line systems; Problem solving; Students; Taxonomy; Teachers; Teaching

The Inverted Classroom in a First-Year Engineering Course A first-year course affords a unique opportunity to implement new instructional techniques since students’ lack of prior college experience leads to less resistance than one might expect in an upper-level course. The first-year engineering program at a large Midwestern university elected to implement the inverted, or flipped, classroom model.1 Through this model, the instructors hoped to dedicate their contact time with the students to addressing conceptual problems and facilitating in-class activities, rather than lecturing about factual material. Further, by holding students accountable for their pre-class preparation, the environment would foster the skills necessary for lifelong learning. Despite the potential of this approach in the first-year engineering classroom, few authors have discussed the inverted classroom in this context.2 The purpose of this paper is to relay the method by which one program applied the inverted classroom model to its first-year engineering classes and to share results of preliminary analyses of the effect this change had on student performance and experience, focusing on fall semester.The fall semester focused primarily on computer-aided problem solving, using Excel, MATLAB,and C/C++. Academic integrity, engineering ethics, data analysis, team building, and the engineering design process were also covered. There was a laboratory component to the course,which included laboratory exercises from a variety of engineering disciplines. The inverted classroom model was applied to each course component. Each instructional day was divided into two parts: preparation and application. The preparation component was completed before class and involved pre-class learning activities such as videos, reading assignments, and tutorials,which were intended to promote remembering and understanding.3 Student completion of the preparation activity was evaluated either through a quiz on the online course management system or through a short assignment submitted at the beginning of class. The application component began with class and included a short set of slides, in-class activities, and homework, often requiring students to use higher level Bloom’s taxonomy skills, such as application, analysis, and evaluation.The authors are currently teaching the course. As of abstract submission, preliminary data suggest that the students are better prepared for class, and the student response seems to be neutral to positive. However, a concrete analysis of student performance and response cannot be completed until the class is closer to conclusion. This will occur before submission of the draft paper. The paper will report on student self-assessment of learning in course objectives in both the traditional and inverted models, use rate of course resources, and responses to the course format. Additionally, student learning gains, as measured through final exam performance.The inverted classroom model has the potential to revolutionize the first-year engineering experience. It allows the instructor to focus on higher-level learning in the classroom and provides students with a strong foundation for lifelong learning. By sharing the strengths and weaknesses of this initial implementation in this paper, the authors hope to provide a resource for other instructors considering the change to the inverted classroom model.1. M.J. Lage, G.J. Platt, and M. Treglia. “Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment,” The Journal of Economic Education, vol. 31, no. 1, Winter2000.2. M. Pedroni and B. Meyer. “The inverted curriculum in practice,” SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 38,no. 1, March 2006.3. L.W. Anderson, et al. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. Addison WesleyLongman, Inc., Illinois, 2001.