Advertisement

Flipping Engineering

  • Marnie Jamieson
  • John M. Shaw
  • Norma Nocente
  • Monica H. Lamm
  • Catherine E. Brewer
  • Glen Miller
  • Qin Zhu
  • Karim Altaii
  • Olga Pierrakos
  • Jens Bennedsen
Chapter
Part of the Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations book series (ECTII)

Abstract

This chapter contains case studies from Engineering. Case study authors discuss Vygotsky’s influence on their choice to use audio, visual, and print materials to scaffold instruction. Concepts from ADDIE and the Successive Approximation Model are also used to guide the development of content and selection of materials. The case studies emphasize the structuring of learning experiences based on individual competencies. Each case study opens with the instructional context and a rationale for flipping the classroom. The case study authors also describe the structure of the course, as well as descriptions about how they prepared their students for flipping, and an evaluation of the flipping experience from both the instructor and student perspectives.

Keywords

Learn Management System Ethic Case Engineering Case Team Base Learn Online Session 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Allen, M., & Sites, R. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.Google Scholar
  2. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, 15(3), 6–11.Google Scholar
  3. Csikszentimihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper & Rowe.Google Scholar
  4. Larsen, S. (1999). Den ultimative formel – for effektive læreprocesse. Hellerup: Steen Larsens Forlag.Google Scholar
  5. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (Eds.). (2004). Team-based learning: a transformative use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Sibley, J., Ostafichuk, P., Roberson, B., Franchini, B., & Kubitz, K. A. (2014). Getting started with team-based learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Ugursal, V. I., & Cruickshank, C. A. (2014). Student opinions and perceptions of undergraduate thermodynamics courses in engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education, 40, 1–18.Google Scholar
  10. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Iowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  3. 3.New Mexico State UniversityLas CrucesUSA
  4. 4.Texas A & M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  5. 5.Liberal Arts and International StudiesColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA
  6. 6.James Madison UniversityHarrisonburgUSA
  7. 7.Aarhus University, School of EngineeringAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations