Flipped Classroom for Doctoral Students: Evaluating the Effectivness
https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2019-28-5-94-103
Abstract
The demand of Industry 4.0 for creative researchers able to adopt to the changing world and think out of the box puts forward the question of education technologies used to prepare such specialists. Though many new education technologies have appeared recently their effectiveness has not yet been proved to be introduced into tertiary education in a large scale. The author presents the evidence for the flipped classroom technology effectiveness. The paper describes the rationale and content of the doctoral program course “English for Research Purposes” delivered using flipped classroom approach. The course was piloted in September-May, 2017/2018 academic year with 197 doctoral students participating. Both quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the flipped classroom was made. Direct education outcomes (students’ scores at the end of the course and attendance rates) and indirect education outcomes (students’ attitudes, perceptions, and feelings towards the course; students’ empowerment and development in the course) were measured using analysis of variance with repeated measures and Likert Scale surveys. The results showed that a general increase in students’ ratings of the effectiveness of the flipped classroom elements was observed during the course, the students’ scores increased 11,3% in comparison with the results of the 2016/2017 academic year where a traditional approach was used. The results of the research can be used to modernize the education process of doctoral students’ training based on flipped classroom technology both at the universities ofRussian Federationand at foreign universities.
About the Author
K. N. Volchenkova
South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Education), Assoc. Prof. of the Department of Foreign Languages
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Education), Assoc. Prof. of the Department of Foreign Languages
References
1. Devonshire, I.M., Dommett, E.J. (2010). Neuroscience: Viable Applications in Education. The Neuroscientist. No. 16(4), pp. 349-356.
2. Goswami, U. (2006). Neuroscience and Education: From Research to Practice. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. No. 7(5), pp. 406-413.
3. Neuroscience Research in Education Summit: The Promise of Interdisciplinary Partnerships between Brain Sciences and Education (2009). University of California, Irvine. Society for Neuroscience. 7 p. Available at: http://www.ndcbrain.com/articles/SocietyforNeuroscienceEducationSummitReport.pdf
4. Borzova, T.A. (2018). [Principles of Self-Study Organization of the First Course Using Flipped Classroom Technology]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 27. No. 8/9, pp. 80-88. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2018-27-8-9-80-88 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
5. Bergmann, J., Sams, A. (2014). Flipping for Mastery. Educational Leadership. No. 71 (4), pp. 24-29.
6. Boyle, T., Bradley, C., Chalk, P., Jones, R., Pickard, P. (2003). Using Blended Learning to Improve Student Success Rates in Learning to Program. Journal of Educational Media. No. 28 (2/3), pp. 165-178.
7. Cusea, J. (1992). Collaborative and Cooperative Learning in Higher Education: A Proposed Taxonomy. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching. No. 2, pp. 2-4.
8. Millis, B., Cottell, P. (1998). Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty. American Council on Education, ORYX Press, p. 284.
9. Estes, M.D., Ingram, R., Liu, J.C. (2014). A Review of Flipped Classroom Research, Practice and Technologies. International HETL Review. No. 4. Available at: https://www.hetl.org/featurearticles/a-review-of-flipped-classroomresearch-practice-and-technologies
10. Berrett, D. (2012). How «Flipping» the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Feb 19. Available at: http://www.chronicle.com/article/HowFlipping-the-Classroom/130857/
11. Enfield, J. (2013). Looking at the Impact of the Flipped Classroom Model of Instruction on Undergraduate Multimedia Students at CSUN. TechTrends. No. 57(6), pp. 14-17.
12. Milman, N. (2012). The Flipped Classroom Strategy: What Is It And How It Can Be Used. Distance Learning. No. 9(3), pp. 85-87.
13. Schroeder, C. (1993). New Students – New Learning Styles. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. Vo. 25, no. 5, pp. 21-26. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1993.9939900
14. Brew, A. (2006). Research and teaching: Beyond the divide. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. 206 p.
15. Froese, A., Gantz, B., Henry F. (1998). Teaching Students to Write Literature Reviews: A Metaanalytic Model. Teaching of Psychology. No. 2, pp. 102-105.
16. Bazanova, E.M., Sokolova, Е.Е. (2017). [Massive Open Online Courses on Academic Writing: Management of Students’ Motivation to Study]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 2 (209). pp. 99-109. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
17. Bazanova, E.M., Korotkina, I.B. (2017). [Russian Writing Centers Consortium]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 4 (211), pp. 50-57. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
18. Korotkina, I.B. (2018). [Academic Writing in Russia: Need for Interdisciplinary Studies]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2018. Vol. 27. No. 10, pp. 64-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2018-27-10-64-74 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
Review
Views:
997
Email this article 