Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using a Flipped Classroom Approach to Support Problem-Based Learning

  • Online learning
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the field of mathematic problem-solving, students are often assigned well-structured problems that have specific ‘right’ answers. However, this misses an important aspect of education, which is to allow the learner to investigate the problem-space of authentic problems. To date, various technology scaffolds have been researched to understand how these tools support students in problem-based learning. One recent strategy includes a ‘flipped classroom’, which suggests that learners be given multimedia videos and class-time is allotted for differentiated instruction. However, very little research exists to understand the ways in which the videos support learners in mathematical problem-solving through the lens of PBL. To address this gap, this work-in-progress study qualitatively investigated the implementation of a flipped classroom for a psychological statistics course. Themes emerged related to relevance, reciprocal learning, teacher as facilitator, and self-efficacy. Implications for practice and future directions are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barrows, H. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(68), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, B. W. (2013). Start flipping out with guide on the side. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 32(4), 257–260. doi:10.1080/01639269.2013.838879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belland, B. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future directions. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 401–412). New York, NY: Spring.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belland, B., French, B., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Validity and problem-based learning research: A review of instruments used to assess intended learning outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1059.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boland, R. J., Tenkasi, R. V., & Te’eni, D. (1994). Designing information technology to support distributed cognition. Organization Science, 5(3), 456–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boshuizen, H. P. A., Wiel, M. W. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2012). What and how advanced medical students learn from reasoning through multiple cases. Instructional Science, 40(5), 755–768. doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9211-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. doi:10.3102/0013189X018001032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (1st ed.). London: Thousand Oaks.

  • Clark, D. B., Sampson, V., Weinberger, A., & Erkens, G. (2007). Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 343–374. doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9050-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabbagh, N., & Williams-Blijd, C. (2010). Students’ perceptions of their learning experiences in an authentic instructional design context. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 4(1). doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1092

  • Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9305-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGrazia, J., Falconer, J., Nicodemus, G., & Medlin, W. (2012). Incorporating screencasts into chemical engineering courses. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.

  • Dolmans, D., & Schmidt, H. (2000). What directs self-directed learning in a problem-based curriculum? In D. Evenson & C. E. Hmelo-Silver (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 251–262). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornan, T., Hadfield, J., Brown, M., Boshuizen, H., & Scherpbier, A. (2005). How can medical students learn in a self-directed way in the clinical environment? Design-based research. Medical Education, 39(4), 356–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K–12 teachers. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eseryel, D., Ifenthaler, D., & Ge, X. (2013). Validation study of a method for assessing complex ill-structured problem solving by using causal representations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(3), 443–463. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9297-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, G., Mitchem, K., Hollingsead, C., Miller, K., Koury, K., & Tsai, H.-H. (2011). Exploring the bridge from multimedia cases to classrooms: Evidence of transfer. Journal of Special Education Technology, 26(2), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., & Land, S. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, H., Tawfik, A., Jonassen, D. H., Winholtz, R., & Khanna, S. (2012). I know this is supposed to be more like the real world, but…: Student perceptions of a PBL implementation in an undergraduate materials science course. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2013). Creating a learning space in problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/15415015.1334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. (2006). Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning facilitator. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Eberbach, C. (2012). Learning theories and problem-based learning. In S. Bridges, C. McGrath, & T. L. Whitehill (Eds.), Problem-based learning in clinical education (pp. 3–17). Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hollan, J., & Hutchins, E. L. (2010). Opportunities and challenges for augmented environments: A distributed cognition perspective. In S. Lahlou (Ed.), Designing user friendly augmented work environments (pp. 237–259). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions Compututer Human Interaction, 7(2), 174–196. doi:10.1145/353485.353487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, W. (2006). The 3C3R model: A conceptual framework for designing problems in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/15415015.1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2008). Problem-based learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merrienboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 659–670). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments (1st ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Cho, Y. (2011). Fostering argumentation while solving engineering ethics problems. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(4), 680–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M. (2011). A further study of productive failure in mathematical problem solving: Unpacking the design components. Instructional Science, 39(4), 561–579. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9144-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan Academy (2014) Retrieved December 17, 2014, from http://www.khanacademy.org.

  • Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper, E., & de Pater-Sneep, M. (2013). Student perceptions of drill-and-practice mathematics software in primary education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 215–236. doi:10.1007/s13394-013-0088-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazonder, A. (2014). Inquiry learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 453–464). New York, NY: Spring.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, H., & Walker, A. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1). Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/vol3/iss1/3.

  • Loyens, S., Magda, J., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 411–427. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9082-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. E., & Smith, J. (2008). Case study of the introduction of problem-based learning in electronic engineering. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 45, 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: A strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9(4), 473–481. doi:10.1187/cbe.10-04-0063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasr, K., & Ramadan, B. (2008). Impact assessment of problem-based learning in an engineering science course. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 9(3), 16–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers & Education, 61, 59–76. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, B. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1). Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/vol1/iss1/3.

  • Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77–96. doi:10.1007/BF02505026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H., Loyens, S., van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 91–97. doi:10.1080/00461520701263350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? a meta-synthesis of meta analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vardi, I., & Ciccarelli, M. (2008). Overcoming problems in problem-based learning: A trial of strategies in an undergraduate unit. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(4), 345–354. doi:10.1080/14703290802377190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, (Eds.). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 506–515. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, F.-Y., & Chen, Y.-J. (2014). Effects of student-generated questions as the source of online drill-and-practice activities on learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 316–329. doi:10.1111/bjet.12036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Northern Illinois University, Gabel Hall 101G, DeKalb, IL, 60115, USA

    Andrew A Tawfik

  2. Concordia University Chicago, 7400 Augusta Street, Christopher Center (Office – CC 351), River Forest, IL, 60305, USA

    Christopher Lilly

Authors
  1. Andrew A Tawfik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher Lilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew A Tawfik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tawfik, A.A., Lilly, C. Using a Flipped Classroom Approach to Support Problem-Based Learning. Tech Know Learn 20, 299–315 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-015-9262-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-015-9262-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation