‘Flipping the classroom’: a theoretical and practical exploration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v4i8.99Abstract
This case study explores the use of the ‘flipped classroom’ in the context of an undergraduate Academic Preparation course. The initiative inverted delivery of the course in that the students studied the formal content as homework and small group discussion and individual support was provided during face to face classroom time. There is very little research evidence in support of the recommendations that by flipping the classroom overall student learning is improved. Therefore this study explores the concepts that underpin the flipped classroom both theoretically and practically, and reports on student feedback of the initiative. As a group the students expressed low levels of satisfaction with the course delivery but individually students reported a strong sense of personal achievement.References
Ayers , D. F. (2011). A Critical Realist Orientation to Learner Needs. Adult Education Quarterly, 341 - 357.
Bamber, V. (2011). Institutional evaluative practice: quality enhancement and regulation. In M. Saunders, P. Trowler, & V. Bamber, Reconceptualising Evaluation in Higher Education: The Practice Turn (pp. 127 - 132). Maidenhead: Open University press.
Barnett, R. (2011). Being a University (Foundations and Futures of Education). Oxford: Routledge.
Baron, J., Willis, J., & Lee, R.-A. (2010). Creating Higher Education Academic and Information Technology Resources in an International Context. Computers in the Schools, 288 - 308.
Barthes, R. (1967). Death of the Author. Translated into English in: Image Music Text in 1977.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012, May). Flipping the Classroom. www.TECHLEARNING.COM, pp. 42-43.
Bergmann, J., Overmyer, J., & Wilie, J. (2012, April 14). The Flipped Classroom: Myths vs Reality. The Daily Riff: Be Smarter About Education.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory Reseach and Critique. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Berrett, D. (2012, February 24). How 'Flipping' the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture. The Chronical of Higher Education, pp. 16-18.
Burrus, C., & Baraniuk, R. G. (2008). Global Warming Toward Open Educational Resources. Communications of the ACM, 30-32.
Callon, M. (2012). Society in the Making:The Study of Technology as a Tool for Sociological Analysis. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. Pinch, The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 77 - 98). Cambridge Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Evans, M. A. (2011). A critical-realist response to the postmodern agenda in instructional design and technology: a way forward. Education Tech Research Dev, 799- 815.
Jump, L. (2011). Why university lecturers enhance their teaching through the use of technology: a systematic review. Learning, Media and Technology, Vol. 36, Issue 1, pp55-68.
Kline, R., & Pinch, T. (1985). The Social Construction of Technology. In D. MacKenzie, & J. Wajcman, The Social Shaping of Technology (pp. 113 - 115). Maidenhead: open University Press.
Krause, K.-L. (2011). Whole-of-University strategies for evaluating the student experience. In M. Saunders, P. Trowler, & V. Bamber, Reconceptualising Evaluation in Higher Education: The Practice Turn (pp. 139 - 144). Maidenhead: Open University press.
Lane, P., & McAndrew, P. (2010). Are open educational resources systematic or sytemic change agents for teaching practice? British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp 952-962.
Letourneau, N., & Allen, M. (1999). Post-positivist critical multiplism: a beginning dialogue. Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp 623-630.
Saunders, M. (2011). Insights into programmatic evaluative practice in HE: a commentary. In M. Saunders, P. Trowler, & V. Bamber, Reconceptualising Evaluation in Higher Education: The Practice Turn (pp. 113 - 124). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Wiley, D., & Gurrell, S. (2009). Context and Catalyst: a decade of development... Open Learning, 11-21.
Young, M. F. (2008). Bringing Knowledge Back In: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Oxford: Routledge.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Compass: Journal of Learning & Teaching provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a more equitable global exchange of knowledge.
Â
Works are released under the default licence of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY) licence, which provides unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. If authors require a divergent licence, please contact [happy to have 'the Scholarly Communications Manager' (ks8035h@gre.ac.uk) listed here if that is easier.]
Â
Authors of articles published in Compass: Journal of Learning & Teaching remain the copyright holders to their published work and grant third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article according to terms of the Creative Commons license agreement applied to the work by Compass: Journal of Learning & Teaching.
Â
Self-archiving policy: authors are permitted, and encouraged, to deposit any version of their article - submitted, accepted, and published versions - in subject and institutional repositories at any time.Â
Â
If you have any queries about the choice of license, or which to discuss other options, please contact the Scholarly Communications Manager at scholarlycommunications@greenwich.ac.uk.