Changing student opinion of flipped learning

Williams, Neil (2018) Changing student opinion of flipped learning. In: Variety in Chemistry Education / Physics Higher Education Conference 2018; 23 - 24 Aug 2018, Sheffield, U.K.. (Unpublished)


Flipped learning was introduced in the second year of the chemistry degree course in  2004. The approach involved working through short inorganic chemistry study packs  with embedded learning activities and on-line MCQ quizzes before attending  workshops. This initially resulted in improvement in student attainment and student  satisfaction (Williams et. al. 2008). Similar findings have been reported elsewhere  (Seery, 2015). More recently Flipped Learning has been adopted in a second year  physical chemistry module, where screencasts are provided. Recent feedback has  indicated a decline in student satisfaction with flipped learning, particularly in  Inorganic Chemistry. This prompted some re-evaluation of the approach.  We report research into Chemistry students’ views of Flipped Learning. Second and  third year (n=45) completed a questionnaire containing Likert scale and free  response questions on their experience of the Flipped Learning they experienced in  their second year.    Even though there was very little change in the approach in 2017/8 compared to  2016/7, Mann Whitney tests revealed a significant effect of the level of students on  their responses to questions on their enjoyment, subject interest, perceived learning  and academic performance (p <0.05, two tailed). There was no effect of level on  their views of workload or preparation time. This poses the question whether students  appreciate Flipped Learning more when they reflect back on their studies. Qualitative  feedback indicated a strong preference to watching videos or screencasts for  preparation for workshops rather than working through paper-based study packs. This  is in line with the increasing popularity of video material with students.    The qualitative feedback and potential reasons for the differing response of level 5  and 6 students will be discussed in more detail in the presentation.

Actions (Repository Editors)

Item Control Page Item Control Page