Learning gain study in a strategy of flipped learning in the undergraduate level | International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Learning gain study in a strategy of flipped learning in the undergraduate level

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The quest to find innovative ways to implement the teaching–learning process to provide students a significant learning environment has intensified. The inclusion of technology in this process has supported this activity and has induced the appearance of new didactic strategies such as Flipped Learning, among others. While there seems to be an agreement about the advantages and benefits of this strategy compared to others, there is limited evidence about its effectiveness upon student knowledge. Furthermore, research about the relationship between this strategy and the characteristics of the students is scarce. This work aims to study the effects of the Flipped Learning strategy on the learning process of students as well as its association with student characteristics. A quantitative study was applied to 460 students majoring in design, engineering or architecture programs. A Flipped Learning methodology was evaluated in a pre-test/post-test process with focus and control groups. Normalized learning gains were measured to know if the students’ learning outcomes increased when compared to a traditional pedagogic strategy. Additionally, a study of the relationship between these learning gains and the learning styles of the students was conducted. Significant results were found that point to the benefits of Flipped Learning. From a statistical analysis, it was found that students in the focus group had a better performance than students in the control group. This difference is between 0.97280% and 22.79337%. Also, Kinesthetic students had the best learning gains, followed by students in the R, RK, and VRK classifications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Spector, J., Merrill, M., Driscoll, M.: Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC., New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Renes, S., Strange, A.: Using technology to enhance higher education. Innov. High. Educ. 36(3), 203–213 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., Francis, R.: The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: a review of UK literature and practice. The Higher Education Academy, pp. 18–26 (2006)

  4. Daradoumis, T., Bassi, R., Xhafa, F., Caballe, S.: A review on massive e-learning (MOOC) design, delivery and assessment. In: 2013 Eighth International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Internet Computing (3PGCIC), pp. 208–213 (2013)

  5. Ruiz, M.V., Saorín, J.M.: La evaluación auténtica de los procesos educativos. Rev. Iberoam. Educ. 64, 11–25 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Apple, Inc. Challengebasedlearning.org. Challenge Based Learning—Welcome to Challenge-Based-Learning! https://www.challengebasedlearning.org/pages/welcome. Accessed 25 Jan. 2016

  7. Nah, F.F.H., Zeng,Q., Telaprolu, V.R., Ayyappa, A.P., Eschenbrenner, B.: Gamification on education: a review of literature. In: HCI in Business Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8527, pp. 401–409 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bishop, J.L., Verleger, M.A.: The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. In: 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. American Society for Engineering Education (2013)

  9. Toto, R., Nguyen, H.: Flipping the work design in an industrial engineering course. In: Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE 2009. 39th IEEE, pp. 1–4 (2009)

  10. Flippedlearning.org. Definition/Definition. https://flippedlearning.org/definition-of-flipped-learning/ (2015). Accessed 21 December 2017

  11. Amresh, A., Carberry, A.R., Femiani, J.: Evaluating the effectiveness of flipped classrooms for teaching CS1. In: Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, pp. 733–735. IEEE Xplore Digital Library, Oklahoma City (2013)

  12. Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., Swift, A.W.: Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 45, 317–324 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chao, C.-Y., Chen, Y.-T., Chuang, K.-Y.: Exploring students’ learning attitude and achievement in flipped learning supported-computer-aided design curriculum: a study in high school engineering education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 23(4), 514–526 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N., Jahren, C.T.: A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. pp. 1–14 (2017). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.12548/full

  15. Lo, C.K., Hew, K.F.: Using “first principles of instruction” to design mathematics flipped classroom: the findings of two exploratory studies. Educ. Technol. Soc. 20(1), 222–236 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. DeLozier, S.J., Rhodes, M.G.: Flipped class-rooms: a review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educ Psychol Rev 29(1), 141–151 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9356-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cassidy, S.: Learning styles: an overview of theories, models, and measures. Educ. Psychol. 24(4), 419–444 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bi, X.: Associations between psychosocial aspects of English classroom environments and motivation types of Chinese tertiary-level English majors. Learn. Environ. Res. 18(1), 95–110 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Morris, C., Chikwa, G.: Screencasts: how effective are they and how do students engage with them? Act. Learn. High Educ. 15(1), 25–37 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kart, M.: Effects of learning styles on student outcomes in a general education computing course. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 30(4), 37–43 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fleming, N., Baume, D.: Learning styles again: VARK-ing up the right tree! Educ. Dev. 7(4), 4 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Felder, R.M., Silverman, L.K.: Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Eng. Educ. 78(7), 674–681 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fleming, N.: VARK: a guide to learning styles [online]. URL: http://vark-learn.com/the-vark-questionnaire/. Accessed 21 December 2017

  24. Chen, H.Y.-L., Chen N.S.: Design and evaluation of a flipped course adopting the holistic flipped classroom approach. In: 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). IEEE (2014)

  25. Zayapragassarazan, Z., Kumar, S.: Active learning methods. Online Submission 19(1) (2012)

  26. Giorgdze, M., Dgebuadze, M.: Interactive teaching methods: challenges and perspectives. Int. E-J. Adv. Educ. 3(9), 544–548 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Roehl, A., Reddy, S.L., Shannon, G.J.: The flipped classroom: an opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. J. Fam. Consum. Sci. 105(2), 44–49 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kim, H.-S., Jeong, K.-O.: A study on the flipped instructional model to support active and interactive learning. In: 2016 International Conference on Platform Technology and Service (PlatCon). IEEE (2016)

  29. Hake, R.: Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am. J. Phys. 66(1), 64 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zimmerman, D.W.: Comparative power of student t test and Mann-Whitney U test for unequal sample sizes and variances. J. Exp. Educ. 55(3), 171–174 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mason, G.S., Shuman, T.R., Cook, K.E.: Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Trans. Educ. 56(4), 430–435 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hartley, M.S., Treagust, D.F.: Learner perceptions of the introduction of computer-assisted learning in mathematics at a peri-urban school in South Africa. Learn. Environ. Res. 17(1), 95–111 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lacher, L.L., Lewis, M.C.: The effectiveness of video quizzes in a flipped class. In: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, pp. 224–228 (2015)

  34. Gehringer, E.F., Peddycord III, B.W.: The inverted- lecture model: a case study in computer architecture. In: Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, pp. 489–494 (2013)

  35. Li, S., Dan, F.: Factors of college students in the flipped classroom. In: 2015 10th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE). IEEE, pp. 805–809 (2015)

  36. Baldwin, D.: Can we flip non-major programming courses yet? In: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, pp. 563–568 (2015)

  37. O’Flaherty, J., Phillips, C.: The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: a scoping review. Internet High. Educ. 25, 85–95 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jensen, J.L., Kummer, T.A., d M Godoy, P.D.: Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 14(1), ar5 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mooi, E., Sarstedt, M.: Cluster analysis, pp. 237–284. Springer, Berlin (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Arnup, J.L., Murrihy, C., Roodenburg, J., McLean, L.A.: Cognitive style and gender differences in children’s mathematics achievement. Educ. Stud. 39(3), 355–368 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Alaoutinen, S.: Effects of learning style and student back- ground on self-assessment and course performance. In: Proceedings of the 10th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, pp. 5–12 (2010)

  42. Wolfman, S.A., Bates, R.A.: Kinesthetic learning in the classroom. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 21(1), 203–206 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Caponetto, I., Earp, J., Ott, M.: Gamification and education: a literature review. In: European Conference on Games Based Learning, vol. 1. Academic Conferences International Limited (2014)

  44. Nwokeji, J.C., Holmes, T.S.: The impact of learning styles on student performance in flipped pedagogy. In: Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE (2017)

  45. Pardo, A., Mirriahi, N., Dawson, S., Zhao, Y., Zhao, A., Gašević, D.: Identifying learning strategies associated with active use of video annotation software. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge. ACM, pp. 255–259 (2015)

  46. Khan, M., Ibrahim, M.: Flipped classroom in technology courses-impact on personal efficacy and perception based on learning style preferences. In: 2017 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC). IEEE (2017)

  47. Bergmann, J., Sams, A.: Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement. International Society for Technology in Education, Washington, D.C. (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hayashi, Y., Fukamachi, K.-I., Komatsugawa, H.: Collaborative learning in computer programming courses that adopted the flipped classroom. In: 2015 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTiCE). IEEE (2015)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial and the technical support of Writing Lab, TecLabs, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico, in the production of this work. The authors would like to acknowledge the professors and directors who supported the implementation of the present study in courses of the Mexico City campus of Tecnologico de Monterrey.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico City Campus, Calle del Puente 222. Ejidos de Huipulco, Tlalpan, Mexico City, Mexico

    Gilberto Huesca Juárez

  2. School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Guadalajara Campus, Av. General Ramón Corona 2514, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico

    Linda Margarita Medina Herrera

Authors
  1. Gilberto Huesca Juárez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Linda Margarita Medina Herrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gilberto Huesca Juárez.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huesca Juárez, G., Medina Herrera, L.M. Learning gain study in a strategy of flipped learning in the undergraduate level. Int J Interact Des Manuf 13, 1245–1258 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00594-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00594-3

Keywords