Journal of Engineering Education Transformations

Journal of Engineering Education Transformations

Year: 2020, Volume: 34, Issue: Special Issue, Pages: 170-174

Original Article

Flipped Classroom - Role of Technical Assemblage

Abstract

Recent advances in teaching-learning methodology advocate self-learning and the use of technology to realize the intended outcomes. The Flipped classroom is one such approach, which encourages self-learning and uses technology to automate some of the components of the learning process. While the flipped classroom is found to be very effective, there are challenges in adopting this approach for both the faculty and the learners. At ekLakshya Innovation Labs, Hubballi, Karnataka, India, the flipped classroom is being used for all the training batches. To maximize the learning outcomes a new activity, which is referred as Technical Assemblage, was introduced as a part of the flipped classroom. The expected outcomes from this were improvement in learning for every learner, the ability to formulate and ask questions and the ability to articulate one�s understanding. It is likely, that all the learners would not actively participate in the classroom discussion and all may not ask a question. To fill the gap this activity was designed where each learner has an opportunity to participate and ask questions in the presence of an observer. Technical assemblage, in brief, is a wellplanned and co-ordinated explorative discussion in the presence of an observer. In this activity, participants take one of these 3 roles - presenter, audience, or observer. The first step is, to identify topics that were found to be difficult in the pre-class assessments. These topics are then distributed to the learners so that each learner gets an opportunity to present and lead a discussion. While the observer takes responsibility for the scope, the flow of discussion remains fluid. The Technical Assemblage is implemented in multiple training batches and the post-class assessment results of the conventional flipped classroom and proposed method for a particular topic are analyzed. The average score of learners for the conventional method is 69% and for the proposed method is 79%. Comparing the data of the conventional flipped classroom and proposed method there is a 10% improvement for the proposed method, which is significant.

References

  • Braseby, A.M., 2014. The Flipped Classroom. IDEA Paper# 57. IDEA Center, Inc.
  • Hyman, M.R. and Sierra, J.J., 2016. Open-versus close-ended survey questions. Business Outlook, 14(2), pp.
  • Shraddha, B.H., Iyer, N.C., Kotabagi, S., Mohanachandran, P., Hangal, R.V., Patil, N., Eligar, S. and Patil, J., 2020. Enhanced Learning Experience by Comparative Investigation of Pedagogical Approach: Flipped Classroom. Procedia Computer Science, 172, pp.22-27.
  • Szparagowski, R., 2014. Exploring the Effectiveness of the Flipped Classroom.
  • Zainuddin, Z. and Halili, S.H., International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Flipped Classroom Research and Trends from Different Fields of Study, 17 (3).
  • Halili, S.H. and Zainuddin, Z., 2015. Flipping the classroom: What we know and what we don�t. The online Journal of Distance Education and elearning, 3(1), pp.28-35.
  • Eppard, J. and Rochdi, A., 2017. A Framework for Flipped Learning. International Association for Development of the Information Society.
  • McCabe, A. and O'Connor, U., 2014. Studentcentred learning: the role and responsibility of the lecturer. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), pp.350 359.
  • Bishop, J.L. and Verleger, M.A., 2013, June. The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE national conference proceedings, Atlanta, GA (Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 1-18).
  • Sabilah, I. and Manoy, J.T., 2018, January. The Use of Open-Ended Questions with Giving Feedback (OEQGF) for Effective Mathematic Learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 947, No. 1, p. 012032). IOP Publishing.
  • Worley, P., 2015. Open thinking, closed questioning: Two kinds of open and closed question. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, 2(2).
  • Hyman, M.R. and Sierra, J.J., 2016. Open-versus close-ended survey questions. Business Outlook, 14(2), pp.1-5.

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles and news.