Abstract
We formally incorporated the “flipped classroom” into our undergraduate mechanical engineering curriculum during the fall of 2013. In addition to a second-year course in mechanics and statics, we also flipped the laboratory portion of a required second-year course in introductory mechanical design taken by over 200 students annually. The CAD modelling portion of the course was delivered in a flipped fashion, in which students applied their SolidWorks knowledge during the weekly two-hour laboratory session. In the “flipped classroom”, face-to-face time is used for application of skills versus the conveyance of facts. To enable this approach, students watched video lectures before class. This course was part of a school-wide initiative to drive active learning, engagement, and deeper learning. We obtained positive results with flipping this course, as perceived by the students, teaching assistants, and instructor. Structured classroom observation revealed many of the ideals of the flipped classroom, including teamwork, peer discussions, active questioning, and problem-solving. Using the Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (TDOP), we observed that nearly 100% of the observation segments contained problem-solving with SolidWorks as the TAs circulated and assisted students. This interactive environment aligned with our finding from the College and University Classroom Environment Inventory (CUCEI), in which students rated the Personalization dimension, which assesses student-to-teacher interaction, highest. We benchmarked our CUCEI results against those of STEM classrooms at two other schools. Our direct assessment of learning based on SolidWorks take-home assignments showed statistically equivalent results when comparing the pre-flipped to the flipped course, as have other mechanical engineering studies in the literature. However, during a semi-structured interview, the instructor reflected that students in the flipped class were more sophisticated, proficient SolidWorks users, attributing this to more practice time available with the flipped classroom. Based on student survey data, nearly 60% of respondents preferred using class time for active learning versus listening to a lecture; thus, the majority realized the value of the flipped approach. A content analysis showed the most frequently perceived benefit to be the flexibility associated with video or online learning, as noted by 46% of respondents. The instructor noted that students in the flipped classes displayed greater confidence and interest in SolidWorks compared to students in previous classes. However, the TAs noticed that students were not watching the videos in all cases, necessitating the use of accountability quizzes. Despite some challenges and a lack of statistical significance of the homework results, we considered this to be a successful implementation of the flipped classroom given the level of student engagement. Going forward, flipped instruction will be the teaching and learning format that we plan to use with this course as well as others in the mechanical engineering department.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited (pp. 382–384). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Baxter Magolda, M., & King, P. (Eds.). (2004). Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing LLC.
Cavalli, M., Neubert, J., McNally, D., & Jacklitch-Kuiken, D. (2014). Comparison of student performance and perceptions across multiple course delivery modes. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Indianapolis, IN.
Chi, M. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105.
Coll, R., Taylor, N., & Fisher, D. (2002). An application of the questionnaire on teacher interaction and college and university classroom environment inventory in a multicultural tertiary context. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 165–183.
Connor, K., Newman, D., & Morris Deyoe, M. (2014). Flipping a classroom: a continual process of refinement. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Indianapolis, IN.
Finelli, C., & Daly, S. (2011). Teaching practices of engineering faculty: perceptions and actual behavior. In Proceedings of the Research in Engineering Education Symposium, Madrid, Spain.
Fraser, B., & Treagust, D. (1986). Validity and use of an instrument for assessing classroom psychosocial environment in higher education. Higher Education, 15, 37–57.
Hake, R. (2001). Interactive engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
Hora, M., & Ferrare, J. (2013). Instructional systems of practice: A multidimensional analysis of math and science undergraduate course planning and classroom teaching. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(2), 212–257.
Hora, M., Ferrare, J., & Oleson, A. (2012). Findings from classroom observations of 58 math and science faculty. Research Report: Culture, Cognition, and Evaluation of STEM Higher Education Reform NSF # DRL-0814724.
Leicht, R., Zappe, S., Litzinger, T., & Messner, J. (2012). Employing the classroom flip to move ‘lecture’ out of the classroom. Journal of Applications and Practices in Engineering Education, 3(1), 19–31.
Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Norusis, M. (2005). SPSS 14.0 statistical procedures companion. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Papadopoulos, C., & Roman, A. S. (2010). Implementing an inverted classroom model in engineering statics: initial results. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY.
Personal Communication with Barry J. Fraser, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor, Associate Dean, and Director of the Science and Mathematics Education Center, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, October 2014.
Personal Communication with Matthew T. Hora, Ph.D., Researcher, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, February & December 2014.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
Salkind, N. (Ed.). (2010). Encyclopedia of research design (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Smith, K., Sheppard, S., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 87–101.
Strayer, J. (2007). The effects of the classroom flip on the learning environment: A comparison of learning activity in a traditional classroom and a flip classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (Publication No. 3279789).
Strayer, J. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171–193.
Zappe, S., Leicht, R., Messner, J., Litzinger, T., & Lee, H. (2009). ‘Flipping’ the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Austin, TX.
Acknowledgements
Support for this flipped classroom initiative was provided by the Swanson School of Engineering and its Engineering Education Research Center (EERC). We also wish to thank Anita Jain, an undergraduate engineering student, who provided invaluable assistance in coding the student responses.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clark, R.M., Clark, W.W., Besterfield-Sacre, M. (2017). Experiences with “Flipping” an Introductory Mechanical Design Course. In: Reidsema, C., Kavanagh, L., Hadgraft, R., Smith, N. (eds) The Flipped Classroom. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3413-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3413-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3411-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3413-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)