Flipping Class: Assessing Differences and Sharing Experiences

1. Flipping Class:Assessing Differences and Sharing Experiences Gerard Beenen California State University, Fullerton March 14, 2014 Assessment Conference XVIII

2. Getting past the hype Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

3. The flipped class model pushes traditional lecture content outside the class, and pulls content application into the class. Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

4. Questions to consider • How effective is a flipped versus traditional version of the same management 340 organizational behavior course? • Are there student characteristics that predict more favorable outcomes for a flipped versus traditional course? • What experiences have you had (+/-) with flipping a course? Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

5. A day in the life of a flipped class student Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

6. Let’s go for a test drive • Example 1 • Excerpt from online module on emotions • Introductory content viewed outside of class • Example 2 • Excerpt from module on decision making • Content viewed outside of class, followed by in-class exercise Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

7. ACME Surfboards • You’re evaluating manufacturing surfboards locally, centrally in the US, or in China. • Local, central and overseas production range from most to least expensive to manufacture. • What criteria are important? Define 3-4 criteria, and weight them in importance (e.g., allocate 100 points to your criteria). • Rate each option on a scale of 1-10, weighted by the importance of each criterion. Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

8. Assessing learning outcomes • Assign discussion groups of 3-5 students. • How are they applying the material in the discussion groups? • Are all or only a few students in discussion? • What kinds of roles are emerging? • Groups used white board space to share their results with class. • Review outputs, identify themes, bring attention to creative solutions Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

9. Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

10. Comparing learning outcomes N=96. *p<.05. +p<.1. Negative relationship depicted in red. Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

11. Quantitative SOQs (1 to 4 scale)Face-to-face vs. flipped format 3.71 3.61 3.45 Students generally preferred f2f over flipped. …but expectations matter! Are they expecting an online or f2f course? Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

12. Qualitative SOQsFlipped format student comments Did well… • “Enjoyed flipped format…is extremely fast-paced…holds student accountable.” • “Group activities helped us better understand the material.” Could improve… • “Could improve the boring internet class. Flipped class is a flop. All online or all in- person.” • “I expected class lecture rather than online lecture. I feel like this is an online class.” Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

13. What predicts interest in a flipped course? Variable • Took a flipped course (control) • Autonomous self-regulation • Big five personality • Kolb’s learning style • Performance goal/implicit theory Δ R2 .12** .08* .03 .02 .10+ N=94. **p<.01. +p<.1. Negative relationship depicted in red. Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

14. Flipping Class (Mgmt 340) Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

15. Conclusions • Worth trying if you have access to online content. • Pre-test content (e.g., with an online class) • Keep online lectures to <20 minutes • No clear evidence for better teaching outcomes. • Student expectations likely play a key role. • Potential person-situation fit issue for students • Autonomous motivation • Avoidance mindset (-) Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways

16. Questions? Background> Application> Analysis> Takeaways