The Evaluation of Different Learning Tools in Flipped Mechanics of Materials

The Mechanics of Materials course has been offered in flipped modality for the past few years at the University of Connecticut. The main objectives for developing this flipped course were to enhance the learning quality in large-enrolment classes and to promote inclusive teaching by providing online course contents to all students. However, there were obstacles observed in offering flipped engineering courses in large classes (over 100 enrollments), such as providing efficient interactions between teacher-student and student-student, aligning students’ progress with the class schedule, and maintaining class engagement. In addition, lack of 3-dimensional visualization, repetitive conceptual mistakes, and plagiarism in homework submissions were seen among students in this engineering classroom. Different learning tools have been tried and tested by the instructor during the past 6 years to address the above obstacles, enhance active participation of students, and improve students’ class experience. The success or failure of these methods has been evaluated through the data collected as part of formal and informal students’ evaluation of teaching (SET). The course contents are delivered via short videos outside of class. The class time is used to review more challenging concepts and includes a short recitation of the lecture material followed by problem solving done by the instructor and the students individually or in groups. The mid semester evaluation of the class revealed that more than 75 percent of students prefer the flipped class over traditional teaching. They indicated that problem solving activities and lecture videos are the most beneficial class components in the students’ learning. To enhance the students’ visualization, foam models and Augmented Reality (AR) are being used. Only 50 percent of students found AR activities (using their smart device) helpful. Pictures from real life applications of each engineering topic were collected and shared via social media (Facebook) in the past classes. Few students showed interest to share pictures or comment on the class Facebook page. Students’ participation increased when these pictures were displayed and discussed during class. Smart Book (containing the online homework platform) was replaced by old fashion paper submission. This platform was selected by the instructor to address the issue of plagiarism as it offers algorithmic problems to each student. The survey showed that more than 80 percent of students prefer the online homework platform (due to instant feedback and comfort of multiple submissions). The teacher assistants were able to spend their time interacting with each student rather than grading homework. Class assessments include online quizzes, midterm exams, and in-class assignments. The main objectives for in-class assignment are encouraging students to watch videos before attending the class and interacting with peers. More than 70 percent of students claimed that team effort enhances their learning and class experience. The students’ perception about effectiveness of each learning tool, the rate of class attendance in sequential semesters, and students’ participation in class activities will be compared and presented. Other techniques used to minimize common engineering errors among students will be shared. Hypotheses and nature of data This work is aimed to evaluate if the inclusion of non-traditional teaching and assessment methods, such as teamwork activities, problem visualization, and physical models improve students’ participation in a basics mechanics course. To investigate these hypotheses, the evaluation data from the class participation and student evaluation of teaching (SET) are summarized and critically discussed. Because the evaluation activities used to inform this paper are limited to “systematic collection of information about the activities, characteristics and outcomes of programs to make judgments about the program (or processes, products, systems, organizations, personnel, or policies), improve effectiveness, and/or inform decisions about future program development,” [1] the author did not seek an IRB approval. This paper reviews the obstacles observed in offering a flipped undergraduate engineering course in the past 6 years, an overview of potential solutions and implementation methods in a large enrollment class, and major findings based on student perceptions of the activities. It is expected that discussing incorporated methods in the flipped classroom to address each challenge, along with providing effectiveness of each method in students’ participation and enhancing the class experience, will help other instructors to add similar activities to their engineering flipped courses in an effort to improve learning quality. Background and components of flipped classes The Mechanics of Materials course is a major requirement for many engineering disciplines including Civil, Mechanical, Biomedical, Material Science, Management and Manufacturing Engineering, and Engineering physics. A flipped classroom offers many advantages to both faculty and students. Inverting the classroom means that events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa [2]. The class has large enrollments of 100 to 120 students per section and an annual enrollment of 400 students. Considering the limited faculty resources and available space, the flipped version of the class was developed in 2013 to enhance the quality of the course, share uniformed resources to all students and provide alternative learning resources for diverse learners. Herreid and Schiller explained the flipped classroom as an educational technique that consists of two parts: interactive group learning activities inside the classroom, and direct computer-based individual instruction outside the classroom [3]. In this flipped course, each lecture is presented with a pair of videos including a lecture video that presents the concept and formulations followed by a sample solving video where 2 or 3 problems are solved in step by step format. The videos are usually 10 to 15 minutes long to maintain students’ attention. A total of 34 lecture videos and 34 sample solving videos are available for this course. The course assessments include weekly homework, bi-weekly multiple-choice quizzes, 3 midterm exams and 1 comprehensive final exam. A detailed class calendar displaying the topic of each day is shared with the students at the beginning of the semester. The class activity includes a short lecture by the instructor about the topics of the day followed by problem solving by students. Students are provided a handout that contains related homework problems and a few problems with a higher level of difficulty in each class. Solutions to these problems are posted at the end of each week. The instructor and his/her teacher assistant guide students during problem solving activities and present the correct solutions on the board. Challenges in the flipped classroom Although flipped classrooms can have many advantages, some issues, such as student resistance to this model and the time required on the part of the instructor to integrate out-of-class and inclass elements, have been identified; thus leading some instructors to question the value of changing to a flipped classroom [4]. This section presents some challenges observed in the flipped classroom, the new components implemented in the class to address the issues, and findings based on students’ feedback or comparison of students’ performance enrolled in different semesters. Class attendance and lack of preparedness: Due to the availability of the course materials in the form of videos, class attendance was decreasing after a few weeks from beginning of the semester. Although, problem-solving activity was offered during class time, only about 50% of class were attending the classroom and the rest did not participate consistently. In addition, students were not necessarily watching videos before attending class. A great number of engineering students work alone. But in industry, teamwork is required most of the time. Incorporating Cooperative Learning (CL) into an engineering program gives students an opportunity to practice problem solving and communication skills in a 'simulated’ professional environment [5], [6]. It was expected that an assessment activity to evaluate students’ learning (on topic of the day) during class time may motivate students to watch videos before attending the class, promote peer interaction, and increase class attendance. To test this hypothesis, a low stake graded teamwork assignment was added to the class requirements. Students are assigned to team of 3 to answer a question related to the topic of the day in 15 to 20 minutes. This activity encourages students to be prepared before the class by watching assigned videos. It also enables students to practice a simulated mini exam (a timed activity with the same level of difficulty) in this low stake assignment. Team members rotate to allow students to meet different peers and experience working with different backgrounds. The instructor and teacher assistants check students’ work, inform each team about mistakes and provide guidance during this activity. This teamwork assignment is randomly offered once a week during the semester. Teamwork activity was offered to students enrolled in class in 2018 and 2019. Table 1 summarizes students’ feedback on effectiveness of this activity in their learning collected from class mid semester surveys. More than 70% of students agreed or strongly agreed that the teamwork activity is beneficial in their learning. Table 1. Responses from initial class survey on if teamwork activity is beneficial to students’ learning (%) Academic Year Agree and Strongly agree Disagree and Strongly disagree