Running Head: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 1 Students’ Perceptions of an Inverted Classroom Model of Instruction in an Undergraduate Human Resource Development Course The Internet presents innovative pedagogical opportunities and learning spaces for educators in higher education to further engage students in academia (Rourke & Coleman, 2010). There is overwhelming evidence corroborating the notion that new innovative ideas and resources continue to evolve seeking to enhance education and improve transfer of learning. Wang (2010) corroborates “Currently, many educators are focusing their efforts on the design and implementation of more active and collaborative methods of teaching and learning, in order to better prepare learners for the teamwork and project/problem solving approaches necessary for work places in the 21 st century” (p. 831). Online learning has provided new tools and applications for merging innovative learning environments to engage the needs and learning preferences of students (Ishtaiwa & Abulibdeh, 2012). In the last 12 years, educational research has provided ample support for the assertion that students in online- learning conditions perform better than those receiving face-to-
136
Embed
How do inverted classroom (flipping the classroom ...€¦ · Web viewStudents’ Perceptions of an Inverted Classroom Model of Instruction in an Undergraduate Human Resource Development
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Running Head: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 1
Students’ Perceptions of an Inverted Classroom Model of Instruction in an Undergraduate
Human Resource Development Course
The Internet presents innovative pedagogical opportunities and learning spaces for
educators in higher education to further engage students in academia (Rourke & Coleman, 2010).
There is overwhelming evidence corroborating the notion that new innovative ideas and
resources continue to evolve seeking to enhance education and improve transfer of learning.
Wang (2010) corroborates “Currently, many educators are focusing their efforts on the design
and implementation of more active and collaborative methods of teaching and learning, in order
to better prepare learners for the teamwork and project/problem solving approaches necessary for
work places in the 21st century” (p. 831). Online learning has provided new tools and
applications for merging innovative learning environments to engage the needs and learning
preferences of students (Ishtaiwa & Abulibdeh, 2012). In the last 12 years, educational research
has provided ample support for the assertion that students in online-learning conditions perform
better than those receiving face-to-face instruction (Ke & Kwak, 2013). With the focus on
enhancing the design and implementation of active teaching methods and the perceived success
of online learning, the use of a new blended learning environment has been inspired.
A blended learning environment seeks to further engage students and improve transfer of
learning in academia by utilizing face-to-face and online components. Commonly referred to as
“flipping the classroom,” the inverted classroom incorporates a blended learning environment.
Silberman (2006) argues that, “With a blended solution, trainers can use e-learning [online] to
deliver information content, assess performance, and provide individual feedback. Time spent in
the classroom is then reserved for whole group discussions, practice, and rehearsals, and face-to-
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 2
face interaction” (p. 201). Mason, Shuman and Cook (2013) define the inverted classroom by
describing its characteristics: “In an inverted classroom, course content is disseminated outside
the classroom through traditional formats such as assigned readings and homework problems and
through new formats such as video lectures, PowerPoint presentations and Web-based tutorials”
(p. 430). An inverted classroom incorporates face-to-face time with the instructor to discuss and
apply the course content learned outside of class through interactive and collaborative activities
(Mason, Shuman, & Cook, 2013). Strayer (2012) adds, “Because the two different learning
experiences are so different, there is a real opportunity for a blended learning environment to
have a synergistic effect in which the whole is greater than the combined parts” (p.191).
Through a blended learning approach, the inverted classroom attempts to strengthen the assets of
the face-to-face and online components while minimizing their drawbacks (Wang, 2010).
Although, previous literature ascertains that educators are focusing their efforts on new
innovative instructional designs and resources to enhance education and increase transfer of
learning, minimal research on students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of
instruction creates barriers to understanding the impact of the model on the students.
Purpose of the Study
The primary purpose of this study was to analyze students' perceptions of the inverted
classroom model of instruction applied in the Development of Materials and Programs
(LTLE485) course of the Human Resource Development (HRD) minor at James Madison
University. Various innovative instructional strategies are being implemented in higher
education to enhance education and increase transfer of learning. The inverted classroom
disseminates course content outside the classroom and then provides opportunities for discussion
and application of the content during face-to-face time with the instructor. By evaluating
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 3
students' perceptions of an inverted classroom model, higher educators have the opportunity to
understand the impact this model has on their students and the future of academics. Although
there has been relatively little research on students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model,
Ke and Kwak (2013) advocate the view that, “Among multiple measures for online learner
success, learner satisfaction is an important measure” (p. 98). Analyzing students’ perceptions,
and ultimately satisfaction, of the inverted classroom model of instruction provides valuable
information on the students’ perceived success of the inverted classroom.
Research Questions
By identifying and analyzing students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of
instruction, the researcher will attempt to answer the following research questions in this study:
RQ1: What are students’ perceptions of their attitudes, feelings, and preferences towards
the inverted classroom model of instruction?
RQ2: What are students’ perceptions of the procedures, operations, methods, and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction?
RQ3: What are students’ perceptions of their acquisition of information and concepts
related to the course content in the inverted classroom model of instruction?
Hypotheses
1. The more the students positively perceive the inverted classroom model of instruction based
on their attitudes, feelings, and preferences, the more they will positively perceive the
procedures, operations, methods and techniques.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 4
2. The more the students positively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and techniques
of the inverted classroom model of instruction, the more they will positively perceive their
acquisition of information and concepts related to the course content.
3. The more the students negatively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction, the more they will negatively perceive
their acquisition of information and concepts related to the course content.
Assumptions, Limitations, and Scope
In this study, it is assumed the Development of Materials and Programs was taught using
an inverted classroom model of instruction based on the course design in the syllabus and the
students’ responses to the questions provided in this study. The study is limited because it only
considers two sections of the course during a single semester at a medium-sized university in
Virginia. Also, the course uses an alternative approach to the inverted classroom model of
instruction where the students are required to read assigned chapters in the textbook and then
actively participate in an inverted (flipped) discussion board. Class sessions are then centered on
project work and training facilitations that are derived from the readings and involve active
dialogue. The scope of the study includes students in the Development of Materials and
Programs (LTLE485) during the 2014 spring semester.
Significance of the Study
The analysis of students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction will
provide valuable information to aid higher educators who are seeking to incorporate new
innovative ideas and resources to enhance education and improve transfer of learning. With the
results of this study, higher educators will be able to gather information concerning what
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 5
students think and feel about the inverted classroom model of instruction. The present study will
also be able to identify barriers to implementing the inverted classroom. By identifying the
perceived strengths and weaknesses of the course, the Development of Materials and Programs
inverted classroom may be able to foster a more supportive environment for the students.
Aside from supporting the students by understanding the implications for teaching and
learning, the study will benefit future facilitators of the Development of Materials and Programs
course. Future facilitators of the course will be able to review the results of students’ perceptions
regarding the inverted classroom, and then alter their instruction to increase the positive
attributes associated with the course. As a result of the teacher’s implementation of the inverted
classroom model of instruction, students’ academic achievement has the potential to increase.
For teachers implementing the traditional classroom model of instruction, the inverted classroom
model of instruction is a proven teaching strategy that will benefit all students. The inverted
classroom model of instruction has many features such as student-centered learning, active
learning, educational technology and blended learning. As a result, this research will help
increase awareness of the benefits of the inverted classroom model of instruction and provide
teachers with a rationale for implementing the model in order to ensure student success in the
classroom.
Definitions
A number of frequently used terms are defined in the following section as a point of
reference for this study. All of the following terms will be described and their relationship to the
study will be examined in further detail in later sections of this paper.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 6
Student-Centered Learning: “Student-centered learning environments provide interactive,
complimentary activities that enable individuals to address their unique learning interests
and needs, examine content at multiple levels of complexity, and deepen understanding”
(Cubukcy, 2012, p. 51-52).
Blended Learning: “Blended Learning is learning that is facilitated by the effective
combination of different modes of delivery, models of teaching and styles of learning,
and founded on transparent communication amongst all parties involved with a course”
(Heinze & Procter, 2004, p. 12).
Learning Management System (LMS): “Learning management systems provide a secure
and highly structured online learning environment, supporting various types of
pedagogical approaches” (Tomberg, Laanpere, Ley, & Normak, 2013, p. 110).
Personal Learning Environment (PLE): “By contrast, when using Web 2.0 tools, a
student or teacher is able to build a personal learning environment (PLE), which gives
their owners high levels of choice and control over their learning activities” (Tomberg et
al., 2013, p. 110).
Inverted Classroom: An inverted style of the traditional pattern of teaching that utilizes
technology to introduce content to students outside of the classroom while assigning in-
class activities to engage students further inside the classroom (Strayer, 2012).
Now that key terms have been defined, the next section of this paper presents a review of
the literature, beginning with a look at eclectic instructional design and learning theories.
These theories will serve to explain and help illuminate the theoretical frameworks behind
the creation of instruction. This section will also explain various educational technologies.
Finally, the inverted classroom model of instruction will be examined in order to understand
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 7
the components of the model and provide advantages and challenges for teachers and
students.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 8
Literature Review
In an attempt to understand students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of
instruction a review of literature was conducted. The following chapter includes the literature
review methodology, the conceptual framework, theoretical framework and a review of the
pertinent literature. Additional literature was used to provide background information and
context; however, the following section specifically addresses the variables and hypotheses
discussed in the first chapter.
Literature Methodology
To begin this review, several research databases were used to identify articles for
Through the implementation of qualitative research, a word-based analysis and thematic
analysis present a number of suggestions regarding how students perceive the inverted model of
instruction. The following three key variables were investigated about students’ perceptions of
the inverted classroom model of instruction: 1. Their attitudes, feelings, and preferences of the
inverted classroom model of instruction, 2. The procedures, operations, methods, and techniques
of the inverted class model of instruction, and 3. Their acquisition of information and concepts
related to course content. Themes were developed based on qualitative codes that allowed the
researcher to identify commonalities and differences among students’ perceptions of the
strengths and weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of instruction as they relate to the
three key variables; therefore, a thematic analysis was conducted to help determine the elements
where participants positively or negatively viewed the inverted classroom model of instruction.
The following sections identify and describe the word-count analysis the researcher first
evaluated for each qualitative question and identify and describe both implicit and explicit ideas
within the data. The results for the thematic analysis are organized under the three key variables
identified previously. This process served as a way to begin categorizing the data and then
further capturing the complexities of meaning within the textual data. A number of themes and
sub-themes were identified in relation to each variable and are reported in the following section.
Question 10: The tenth question was an opened ended question that asked participants
what they thought were the major strengths of the inverted classroom model of instruction.
Thirty-three participants responded. Table 4 illustrates the ten most frequently used words.
Table 4.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 49
Common words found in participants’ view of the strengths of the inverted classroom model of
instruction.
Word Frequency
Learn 20
Experience 7
Work 7
Student 6
Class 5
Hand 5
Better 4
Classroom 4
Time 4
Table 5.
Participants’ perceptions of the strengths of the inverted classroom model of instruction based on
their attitudes, feelings, and preferences and thematic analysis (n=33).
Attitudes, Feelings,
and Preferences.
Strengths Theme
Gain better experience. Experience
Autonomy. Autonomy
Convenience to students. Convenient
Different experience than sitting through a lecture. ExperienceYou can complete work on your own time – flexibility with schedule.
Autonomy
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 50
You are more in charge of how well you learn: the responsibility is on you. Autonomy
I like the dynamic aspect. ExperienceI can speak about my experience in interviews (related to real world situation projects). Experience
Diverse learning experiences. Experience
Able to complete assignments on your own time. AutonomyFreedom to do your work at your won place and learning to motivate yourself, not be forced to complete work. Autonomy
Students learn time management. Autonomy
Can apply their own learning techniques. Autonomy
Convenient. Convenient
Good feedback from each facilitation. Experience
Independent work. Autonomy
You don’t have to go to class. Autonomy
Independence and autonomy. Autonomy
I like that the professor is not just lecturing. Experience
Makes class less uptight. Experience
Independent learning and project based learning. Autonomy
You can do the learning and work at your own pace. Autonomy
It allows students to work more independently. Autonomy
More flexible approach to learning. Experience
Table 6.
Participants’ perceptions of the strengths of the procedures, operations, methods, and techniques
of the inverted classroom model of instruction and thematic analysis (n=33).
Procedures, Operations,
Methods, and
Techniques
Strengths Theme
Have better discussion. DiscussionThey (students) are not just sitting through a lecture, but presenting the material to enhance learning.
Non-lecture
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 51
I like asynchronous style, where I have objectives/guidelines and times by which to submit my work.
Non-lecture
Interactive group learning. Interactive
Discussion Discussion
Hands on for the students. InteractiveEngaging activities outside of the classroom make you think and apply what you learn in the classroom. Interactive
When teachers create an online design that is interactive using videos that you can actively participate in, students tend to retain much more information.
Interactive
More hands on, so I learn better because I am active learner. InteractiveBy preparing presentations, I learn more about what I am presenting on because I do a lot of research and rehearsing. Interactive
By doing projects (like this client one), I feel like I really get to apply what I learn in the classroom and book into a real world situation.
Interactive
I like that it allows us to come to class with more specific questions on what we don’t understand. Interactive
I like asynchronous style, where I have objectives/guidelines and times by which to submit my work. Practical
Hands on activities in class instead of lectures. InteractiveI feel like hands on experience in and outside of class are helping me learn more than I have learned in most of the HRD courses I have taken.
Interactive
You get hands on experience. Interactive
Ability to retain information through active learning. Interactive
Real world challenges and experience. PracticalPractical applications are evident because of project based learning. Practical
Practical application of materials instead of tests on abstract concepts. Practical
Diverse learning experiences. Experience
Table 7.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 52
Participants’ perceptions of the strengths of the acquisition of information of concepts related to
course content in an inverted classroom model of instruction and thematic analysis (n=33).
Acquisition of
Information and
Concepts Related to
Course Content
Strengths ThemeInverted classrooms give the students the ability to learn the material more effectively. Learn
When teachers create an online design that is interactive using videos that you can actively participate in, students tend to retain much more information.
Learn
More hands on, so I learn better because I am active learner. LearnBy preparing presentations, I learn more about what I am presenting on because I do a lot of research and rehearsing. Learn
By doing projects (like this client one), I feel like I really get to apply what I learn in the classroom and book into a real world situation.
Learn
I feel like hands on experience in and outside of class are helping me learn more than I have learned in most of the HRD courses I have taken.
Learn
Ability to retain information through active learning. Learn
Question 11. The eleventh question was an opened ended questions that asked
participants what they thought were the major weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of
instruction.
Table 8.
Common words found in participants’ view of the weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of
instruction.
Word Frequency
Class(room) 12
Discussion 12
Student 10
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 53
Work 8
Board 6
Much 5
Post 5
Teach 5
Sometime 4
Table 9.
Participants’ perceptions of the weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of instruction based
on their attitudes, feelings, and preferences and thematic analysis (n=27).
Attitudes, Feelings,
and Preferences.
Weaknesses ThemeNot easy to adapt to suddenly because so many classes are primarily lecture based. Adaptability
People argue against inverted classrooms because the professor does little teaching, which is what we are paying them to do. Many don’t realize the benefits of the inverted classrooms.
Role of Teacher
Most are likely to do the work and that’s all. Lack of Motivation
Inverted classrooms do not challenge the learner. Lack of Interest
Distractions. Lack of Interest
Zone out for others during lecture. Lack of Motivation
Forgetting when things are due because lack of communication hurts my motivation.
Lack of Community
You can BS through the online portion, or just disregard the readings and not do work that isn’t graded.
Lack of Motivation
Work can be slacked. Lack of Motivation
Lessens classroom community. Lack of Community
Lessens motivation. Lack of Motivation
Students do not take it seriously. Lack of
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 54
Interest
I sometimes feel lost in the mix. Lack of Motivation
The student has to be prepared. Lack of Interest
I don’t like teaching myself things when I can have a teacher teach me.
Lack of Motivation
Table 10.
Participants’ perceptions of the weaknesses of the procedures, operations, methods, and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction and thematic analysis (n=27).
Procedures, Operations,
Methods, and
Techniques
Weaknesses Theme
Not always getting feedback right away. Lack of Feedback
Face to face interaction lacks. Lack of Interaction
It fills up Canvas/Blackboard with too much information sometimes and it becomes hard to keep up.
Too much Information
Mandatory discussion boards with specific amounts of posts hurt my motivation.
Discussion Boards
Requiring students to do more “fluff work” rather than meaningful projects hurts my motivation. Busy Work
A lot of the assignments are busy work. Busy Work
You can BS through the online portion, or just disregard the readings and not do work that isn’t graded. Busy Work
It gets really boring just sitting through classmates’ presentations, especially when classmates just read off of index cards or PowerPoint slides.
Lack of Interaction
I really don’t like online discussion posts and don’t benefit from those at all.
Discussion Boards
I don’t think discussion boards are always effective. Discussion Boards
Discussion boards are completely useless. Discussion Boards
I feel like the work outside of the classroom is just busy work and I’m not really taking much from it. Busy Work
Too much busy work, not enough instruction from professors. Busy Work
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 55
Discussion board posts are not that engaging in my opinion. Discussion Boards
May not take the time to learn the materials outside of class. Busy Work
I feel like discussion board postings and a lot of assignments I can BS. I am learning as much not doing them as I am doing them…except how to BS more effectively.
Discussion Boards
Online discussion sucks. It doesn’t come close to mirroring what in class dialog can produce in terms of learning.
Discussion Boards
The discussion boards are not helpful. Discussion Boards
Table 11.
Participants’ perceptions of the weaknesses of the acquisition of information of concepts related
to course content in an inverted classroom model of instruction and thematic analysis (n=27).
Acquisition of
Information and
Concepts Related to
Course Content
Weaknesses Theme
Not able to learn all the material. Lack of Learning
I don’t think we fully understand the concepts or the direction of the class when so much information is left up to the students’ discretion.
Lack of Learning
I don’t think students are taught how to teach, so when they teach other students, it is boring and sometimes ineffective.
Lack of Learning
Sometimes it is difficult to fully understand the lecture outside of class because the instructor is not immediately available when you approach a problem you don’t know or understand.
Lack of Learning
I feel like the work outside of the classroom is just busy work and I’m not really taking much from it.
Lack of Learning
I feel like discussion board postings and a lot of assignments I can BS. I am learning as much not doing them as I am doing them…except how to BS more effectively.
Lack of Learning
Online discussion sucks. It doesn’t come close to mirroring what in class dialog can produce in terms of learning.
Lack of Learning
The three variables explored within this research were considered to be key entities of the
inverted classroom model of instruction that were aimed at supporting multiple hypotheses. This
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 56
confirmatory, hypothesis-driven, study was guided by specific hypotheses the researcher wanted
to assess. The following hypotheses were posed:
H1. The more the students positively perceive the inverted classroom model of
instruction based on their attitudes, feelings, and preferences, the more they will
positively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and techniques.
H2. The more the students positively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction, the more they will positively
perceive their acquisition of information and concepts related to the course content.
H3. The more the students negatively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction, the more they will negatively
perceive their acquisition of information and concepts related to the course content.
After reviewing the results of this study, the researcher accepts H1 and H2. The basis for
this acceptance comes from the responses gathered from the open-ended, qualitative portion of
the survey and the responses elicited in the quantitative portion. Hypothesis 1 states, in general
terms, if students enjoy the inverted classroom model of instruction based on their personal
preference that they will like the techniques utilized in the inverted classroom, while hypothesis
2 states if they like the techniques utilized in the inverted classroom they will feel like they are
effectively acquiring the course content. Participants indicated twenty-four strengths associated
with their attitudes, feelings, and preferences of the inverted classroom model of instruction.
The thematic analysis of these strengths included participants’ autonomy, experience, and
convenience in the course. On average, the participants enjoy the inverted classroom model of
instruction (2.98). Participants’ perceived twenty-one strengths of the inverted classroom based
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 57
on the procedures, operations, methods, and techniques with the thematic analysis centering on
the interactive and practical techniques implemented versus a lecture style classroom. On
average, the participants’ find the inverted classroom instructional strategies as an effective way
to enhance learning (3.05). Participants’ perceived only seven strengths with regard to
acquisition of information and concepts related to course content with the thematic analysis
centering on learning the content. Indicated as the lowest average but still in the positive region
of the results, participants’ perceive themselves as effectively learning the course content (2.93).
Evidence of Quality
Internal/External Validity and Reliability. Validity can be defined as the means to
which inferences about the research can be made. The two types of validity that impact the
implications made from the research are: internal validity and external validity. With regard to
internal validity, this study can be challenged by a few arguments. The first argument surrounds
the experience of the survey participants. Fifty-eight percent of the participants indicated they
had previously been enrolled in an inverted classroom model of instruction while twenty-five
percent said they had not and eighteen percent said they did not know. Prior experience in an
inverted classroom model of instruction may have had an impact on their perceptions of each of
the three variables assessed as well as the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the model of
instruction. Some participants’ indicated the model was difficult to adjust to while those who
may have had prior experience could have been adjusted to this model of instruction. The more
experience participants who have been involved in an inverted classroom model of instruction
may have a better idea of what they perceive as strengths and weaknesses than novice
participants.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 58
Another argument against internal validity is there is no guarantee the participants clearly
know what an inverted classroom model of instruction entails or that the Development of
Materials and Programs course is taught in an inverted style. Students’ may have felt confused
by the concepts of the inverted classroom and may be confused by labeling LTLE485 an inverted
classroom. The participants may have felt obliged to answer the questions whether or not they
agree with the classification of their course. Due to the fact that there is no way to determine the
willingness or apprehension that occurs in the minds of the survey participants, the only way to
control validity issues was to create a structured survey that provided three main attributes of an
inverted classroom model of instruction which included the delivery of course content outside of
the classroom, discussion boards to foster content mastery, and in-class activities.
In terms of external validity, the timing of the survey may have impacted survey
participants. The survey was distributed half way through the semester of the course; therefore,
the students may have not had enough time encounter the full effects of the inverted classroom
model of instruction. While many of the survey participants responded with key perceptions and
recommendations, there is no way to tell what could have been recorded if the survey was issued
at a more opportune time at the end of the semester. Another challenge of external validity is the
sample for this study. For the purpose of this study, a purposive sample was chosen because of
their experience in the inverted classroom model of instruction. This is a limitation because it
lacks the evidence to generalize the data results for larger populations. A further discussion of
this issue is addressed in recommendations for future study.
Despite the threats to internal and external validity, the reliability of the study does not
appear to be jeopardized. The survey was distributed to students in both sections of the
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 59
Development of Materials and Program course during the spring 2014 semester. The data
collection can be assumed that all responses came from appropriate subjects in the two sections.
This enables other researchers to conduct a similar study in nature at other universities, and
replicate its findings accordingly. The only limitation to this reliability is that the study was only
conducted for a Human Resource Development minor course at one mid-sized university in
Virginia, and the results may be unique to the subject and collegiate level of the course.
The data analysis and results section of this research study recorded and analyzed the
quantitative and qualitative data collection from the mixed methodology research design
regarding students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction. It was
determined that the majority of the participants agree that they enjoy the inverted classroom
model of instruction, they find the techniques utilized in the inverted classroom model of
instruction to enhance learning, and effectively learn the course content. The participants’
suggestions were complemented by their perceptions that culminated in the qualitative questions
on the survey. While students positively perceive the inverted classroom model of instruction,
students provided specific strengths and weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of
instruction. The next section of this study provides a brief overview of the study, interpretations
of the findings on students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction,
recommendations for action and further study, and a reflection of the researcher’s experience.
Conclusion
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 60
The purpose of this study was to analyze students' perceptions of the inverted classroom
model of instruction employed in the Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE485)
course in the Human Resource Development (HRD) minor at James Madison University. By
evaluating students' perceptions of an inverted classroom model, higher educators have the
opportunity to understand the impact this model has on their students and the future of
academics. Although there has been relatively little research on students’ perceptions of the
inverted classroom model, Ke and Kwak (2013) advocate the view that, “Among multiple
measures for online learner success, learner satisfaction is an important measure” (p. 98).
Analyzing students’ perceptions, and ultimately satisfaction, of the inverted classroom model of
instruction provides valuable information on the students’ perceptions of their success in an
inverted classroom. This study employed a mixed methodology research design utilizing
quantitative and qualitative data collection procedures to identify students’ perceptions of an
inverted classroom model of instruction. The author also conducted research on instructional
design, educational technology, and the inverted classroom model of instruction in order to better
examine students’ perceptions of the various elements in the implementation of the inverted
classroom. A review of the findings, recommendations for action and future research, limitations
of the study and a reflection of the researchers’ experience will be discussed in the next sections
of the study.
Interpretation of Findings
A number of findings from this research are important for the future study of students’
perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction. This research identified a number of
themes based on the three variables evaluated in the survey, which are pertinent and valuable to
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 61
higher educators and those implementing an inverted classroom model of instruction. The
researcher attempted to answer the following research questions in this study:
RQ1: What are students’ perceptions of their attitudes, feelings, and preferences towards
the inverted classroom model of instruction?
RQ2: What are students’ perceptions of the procedures, operations, methods, and
techniques of the inverted classroom model of instruction?
RQ3: What are students’ perceptions of their acquisition of information and concepts
related to the course content in the inverted classroom model of instruction?
Attitudes, Feelings, and Preferences. Through the collection and analysis of the data, it
is clear that the students positively perceive the inverted classroom based on their attitudes,
feelings, and preferences. A majority of the students indicated they enjoy learning the course
content outside of the classroom and engaging in hands-on activities inside of the classroom with
the help of an instructor. Mason et al. (2013) indicate three primary motivations for using an
inverted classroom model of instruction, which directly correlate to the data found in this study.
The authors assert a motivation that is supported in the data for students’ attitudes, feelings, and
preferences in the inverted classroom is the encouragement for students to become self-directed
learners. However, many students have a negative perception about online discussion boards
with regard to their attitudes, feelings, and preferences. The qualitative data assisted in
providing in-depth rationale of students’ perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of the
inverted classroom. Various strengths centered on students’ autonomy, experience and
convenience of the course while the weaknesses centered on a lack of motivation, interest and
community, adaptability and the perceived role of the teacher. Students suggested the inverted
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 62
classroom model of instruction allows students the freedom to do work at their own pace, while
some students suggested the inverted classroom decreases motivation.
Procedures, Operations, Methods, and Techniques. From the results of this study,
students positively perceive the procedures, operations, methods and techniques of the inverted
classroom model of instruction. As the highest average, students’ perceptions of the procedures,
operations, methods and techniques suggest students think technology is an effective way to
deliver course content outside of the classroom and hands-on activities in class are an effective
way to enhance learning and engagement. As previously mentioned, Mason et al. (2013)
indicated 2 primary motivations for implementing an inverted classroom.: 1) It allows educators
to present course content in several different formats, and 2. It frees up class time for interactive
activities. The authors’ assertions are supported by the data collected in the present study for the
procedures, operations, methods, and techniques of students’ perceptions of the inverted
classroom model of instruction. Similar to students’ negative perceptions of online discussion
boards previously mentioned, students did not perceive online discussion boards as an effective
way to enhance learning. However, a majority of students listed the interactive and practice
techniques utilized in an inverted classroom model of instruction as an effective way to enhance
learning. While some students find mandatory discussion boards online to be busy work, other
students suggest they feel like the hands-on experience in and outside of class are helping them
to learn more than previous courses.
Acquisition of Information and Course Concepts. Conclusions from the results of this
study indicate students positively perceive their acquisition of information and course concepts
related to course content. A majority of students indicated they effectively learn the course
content outside of the classroom and inside the classroom through in-class activities with the
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 63
help of an instructor. However, over half of the participants disagreed that they effectively learn
the course content through online discussion boards. Applying students’ perceptions of the
strengths and weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of instruction, some students stated
the inverted classroom gives the student the ability to learn the material more effectively, while
other students suggested they don’t think they fully understand the concepts or direction of the
class when so much information is left up to the students’ discretion.
In addition to the three variables addressed in the data collection, the researcher also
attempted to gauge the students’ overall satisfaction level of the inverted classroom model of
instruction. Overall, students appear to be satisfied with the inverted classroom model of
instruction. Students also indicated a greater number of strengths associated with the inverted
classroom model of instruction than weaknesses, which complements the assumption of their
satisfaction level.
Recommendations for Action
As more educators are focusing their efforts on the design and implementation of more
active and collaborative methods of teaching, the inverted classroom model of instruction
provides new innovative instructional design techniques and resources to enhance education and
increase transfer of learning. Minimal research on students’ perceptions of the inverted
classroom model of instruction created an opportunity for this study to present a greater
understanding of the impact the model has on the students’ satisfaction level.
This research provides a foundation to the unveiling of students’ perceptions of the
inverted classroom model of instruction at a mid-sized Virginia university. The analysis of
students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction provided valuable
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 64
information to aid higher educators in the successful implementation of the model into their
instructional design toolbox. With the results of this study, instructors in higher education can
gather information about students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction.
This study was conducted for the Development of Materials and Programs course at
James Madison University for the spring 2014 semester; therefore, the professor and teaching
assistants of the course should analyze the results to have a better understanding of the students’
perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction. In order to successfully implement
an inverted classroom with a greater satisfaction level of the students, it is necessary for the
professor to decide on effective instructional strategies and then implement them. The
qualitative results regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of
instruction will also prove valuable for not only the professor of LTLE485 but also other
educators who may be interested in implementing an inverted classroom.
Recommendations for Further Study
The analysis and results of this study suggest that students positively perceive the
inverted classroom model of instruction. Future research should continue to develop an
understanding of students’ perceptions of the specific strategies of the inverted classroom model
of instruction. A further, in-depth analysis of literature focusing on the various instructional
strategies of the inverted classroom needs to be carried out. While the researcher found
instructional design and educational technology as major components of the inverted classroom
model of instruction, each of these components have various sub-components that need to be
analyzed.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 65
When inquiring into students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction,
it is critical for future research to delve into the students’ acquisition of course content. This
study focused on students’ perceptions of how well they perceived their acquisition of content,
while future studies need to study the actual acquisition and mastery of the course content.
Future studies may want to study quiz, test, or final grades of students in an inverted classroom
compared to those in a traditional classroom. Other ways of understanding students’ acquisition
of course content could be done by observations or interviews.
Understanding the barriers or concerns, which impact students’ efficacy in an inverted
classroom model of instruction, is another area for future research. Students’ efficacy may be
affected by the implementation of different instructional strategies or educational technologies.
In this study, some students indicated autonomy as a positive aspect of the inverted classroom,
while other students indicated their lack of being able to fully understand the concepts when the
information is left up to the students’ discretion.
According to Gikas and Grant (2013), “As mobile devices continue to grow as part of the
higher education landscape, mobile computing devices present both opportunities and challenges
to higher education institutions (p. 18). As presented in the findings, mobile devices or smart
phones accounted for 35% of how students accessed the Internet for educational purposes.
Future research should focus on the implications of assessing educational materials and content
via a mobile device or smart phone.
Limitations
One underlying limitation in this study is the sample size. The sample was small and
therefore not generalizable to the entire population. This study cannot be compared to other
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 66
studies that examined the inverted classroom model of instruction, as the instructional strategies
may differ, but it does set the framework for future research. It also provides educators with an
idea of students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction as well as specific
strengths and weaknesses they perceive.
The researcher’s quantitative scale needs to undergo additional validity testing to ensure
accuracy of the measures. Because the researcher did not find any previously validated
quantitative scale, she had to create her own. Even though the researcher lacked significant
experience in creating quantitative measures, the qualitative data supported and expanded on the
quantitative results, improving the validity of the study.
Due to time constraints on the part of the researcher, other inverted classroom models of
instruction courses were excluded from the study. The researcher only took into account two
sections of one course in a minor study course. Another limitation is researcher bias. To
minimize researcher bias, coding, external audits, and member checks should be developed. If
the survey would have been distributed at the end of the semester, the students may have had
different perceptions and felt more confidence in their responses.
Conclusion
This research provides a foundation to the unveiling of students’ perceptions of the
inverted classroom model of instruction at a mid-sized Virginia university. The analysis of
students’ perceptions of the inverted classroom model of instruction provided valuable
information to aid higher educators in the successful implementation of an inverted classroom
model of instructional. The results of this study highlight students’ positive perceptions of the
instructional strategies of an inverted classroom model of instruction. Furthermore, the
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 67
exploration of strengths and weaknesses of the inverted classroom presented invaluable
information regarding students’ perceptions of specific elements regarding the model. While
past and current studies support the ideas of effective instructional design and educational
technology, future research should be geared towards building upon these theoretical constructs,
as well as finding new ways to appeal to the students’ perceptions. With the overwhelming
evidence corroborating the notion that new and innovative ideas and resources continue to
evolve, educators who are seeking to enhance and improve learner satisfaction and transfer of
learning should focus on the implementation of theoretically based instructional design and
educational technology to implement an inverted classroom model of instruction, ultimately
transforming the classroom.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 68
Appendix A
IRB Approval Form
James Madison UniversityHuman Research Review Request
FOR IRB USE ONLY:
Exempt: Protocol Number: 1st Review: Reviewer:
Expedited: X
IRB: 14-0133 2nd Review: Reviewer:
Full Board:
Received: 3rd Review:
Project Title:
Students’ Perceptions of an Inverted Classroom Model of Instruction in an Undergraduate Human Resource Development Course
Department: Adult Education/Human Resource Development
Address (MSC): 6913
Investigator: Please respond to the questions below. The IRB will utilize your responses to evaluate your protocol submission.
1. YES NODoes the James Madison University Institutional Review Board define the project as research?
The James Madison University IRB defines "research" as a "systematic investigation designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.” All research involving human participants conducted by James Madison University faculty and staff and students is subject to IRB review.
2. YES NOAre the human participants in your study living individuals?
“Individuals whose physiologic or behavioral characteristics and responses are the object of study in a research project. Under the federal regulations, human subjects are defined as: living individual(s) about whom an investigator conducting research obtains: (1) data through intervention or interaction with the individual; or (2) identifiable private information.”
3. YES NOWill you obtain data through intervention or interaction with these individuals?
“Intervention” includes both physical procedures by which data are gathered (e.g., measurement of heart rate or venipuncture) and manipulations of the participant or the participant's environment that are performed for research purposes. “Interaction” includes communication or interpersonal contact between the investigator and participant (e.g., surveying or interviewing).
4. YES NOWill you obtain identifiable private information about these individuals?
"Private information" includes information about behavior that occurs in a context in which an individual can reasonably expect that no observation or recording is taking place, or information provided for specific purposes which the individual can reasonably expect will not be made public (e.g., a medical record or student record). "Identifiable" means that the identity of the participant may be ascertained by the investigator or associated with the information (e.g., by name, code number, pattern of answers, etc.).
5. YES NO Does the study present more than minimal risk to the participants?
"Minimal risk" means that the risks of harm or discomfort anticipated in the proposed research are not greater, considering probability and magnitude, than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests. Note that the concept of risk goes beyond physical risk and includes psychological, emotional, or behavioral risk as well as risks to employability, economic well being, social standing, and risks of civil and criminal liability.
CERTIFICATIONS:
For James Madison University to obtain a Federal Wide Assurance (FWA) with the Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, all research staff working with human participants must sign this form and receive training in ethical guidelines and regulations. "Research staff" is defined as persons who have direct and substantive involvement in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research and includes students fulfilling these roles as well as their faculty advisors. The Office of Research Integrity maintains a roster of all researchers who have completed training within the past three years.
Test module at ORI website http://www.jmu.edu/researchintegrity/irb/irbtraining.shtml
For additional training interests, or to access a Spanish version, visit the National Institutes of Health Protecting Human Research Participants (PHRP) Course at: http://phrp.nihtraining.com/users/login.php.
By signing below, the Responsible Researcher(s), and the Faculty Advisor (if applicable), certifies that he/she is familiar with the ethical guidelines and regulations regarding the protection of human research participants from research risks. In addition, he/she agrees to abide by all sponsor and university policies and procedures in conducting the research. He/she further certifies that he/she has completed training regarding human participant research ethics within the last three years.Meganne Nicole Downey 09/25/2013
The primary purpose of this study is to understand students’ perceptions of the instructional strategies of the inverted class, Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE485), in the Human Resource Development (HRD) minor at James Madison University. Various innovative instructional strategies are being implemented in higher education to enhance learning outcomes. The inverted classroom employs various e-learning tools and applications to present course content outside of the classroom and then allows the students to further engage in the content during the face-to-face component. An inverted classroom provides innovative instructional strategies to address the needs of diverse learning preferences and enhance learning outcomes. Minimal research on students’ perceptions of the instructional strategies implemented in an inverted classroom broadens the potential to understand the impact this approach will have on future academics.
Procedures/Research Design/Methodology/Timeframe
The time frame of this study ranges from the time of pending IRB approval through May 9, 2014. It is anticipated that the research will begin and the survey will be issued via Canvas no later than April 2014, so as to ensure timely student participation as they document their perceptions of the inverted course.
The participants in this study will be undergraduate students from the Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE485) inverted class in the Human Resource Development (HRD) minor program at James Madison University during the spring 2014 semester. LTLE485 is designed to provide students with the basic skills necessary to design and develop performance-based training programs and courses. LTLE485 is facilitated by Dr. Noorie Brantmeier and a teaching assistant for each section. The researcher has received permission from the facilitators to gain access to the announcements in Canvas for students enrolled in LTLE485 at James Madison University.
LTLE485 is the only inverted classroom in the HRD minor and has been taught as an inverted classroom for the past three years under the same facilitators. Although the course is offered during the fall and spring semesters of the academic year, the researcher is only collecting data during the spring 2014 semester. The course has two sections for the spring 2014 semester.
This research will be conducted at the completion of the spring 2014 semester through the implementation of an anonymous, web-based Qualtrics survey distributed to students enrolled in LTLE485 via an announcement in Canvas. It is anticipated that the survey should take ten to fifteen minutes to complete. The email will include a consent form with a cover letter requesting voluntary consent to participate in the survey, as well as a direct link to the Qualtrics survey.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 73
This survey will contain two methodologies to collect data, yielding both quantitative and qualitative responses (consisting of Likert scaled and open ended questions).
Will data be collected from any of the following populations?
Minors (under 18 years of age); Specify Age:
Prisoners
Pregnant Women
Fetuses
Cognitively impaired persons
Other protected or potentially vulnerable population
X Not Applicable
Where will research be conducted? (Be specific; if research is being conducted off of JMU’s campus a site letter of permission will be needed)
James Madison University
Human Resource Development Minor
Memorial Hall 3310, MSC 6913Harrisonburg, Virginia 22807
Will deception be used? If yes, provide the rationale for the deception:
No
Data Analysis
What methodology will be taken to ensure the confidentiality of the data (i.e., how and where data will be stored/secured, how data will be analyzed, who will have access to data, and what will happen to data after the study is completed?)
Data will be stored and analyzed within Qualtrics, the online survey instrument being utilized for this research project. The survey being issued will be anonymous, in that there will be no identifying information attached to any of the research questions being asked. The researcher will not be present while the survey is being completed. Furthermore, any statistical information being analyzed for reporting purposes will be stored on a personal laptop computer that is
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 74
password protected, with any statistical documents being password protected as well. A back-up copy of these documents may be kept on a portable hard drive, which will also be password protected. The researcher will be the only individual who will have any access to this data, which will remain within a password-protected electronic file once the research has been completed. At the end of the study, all records will be destroyed.
Reporting Procedures
Who is the audience to be reached in the report of the study?
The audience to be reached in the report of this study is the researcher’s committee members, which consists of three graduate faculty members within the AHRD/LTLE graduate school. These members are as follows:
Dr. Noorjehan Kelsey Brantmeier – Committee Chair
Dr. Jane Thall – Committee Member / Program Director
Dr. Diane Wilcox – Committee Member / Program Coordinator
How will you present the results of the research? (If submitting as exempt, research cannot be published or publicly presented outside of the classroom)
The results of this research will be presented to a Research Review Committee in a formalized classroom to the committee members listed above through a “defense” of the research and the resulting findings.
How will feedback be provided to subjects?
Within the consent form contained in the email being sent to the survey participants, the researcher’s email address will be printed, so as to allow the participants to contact the researcher with feedback, questions or concerns regarding the study, as well as to give them the opportunity to learn about the results of the study, if they choose to inquire.
Experience of the Researcher (and advisor, if student):
Meganne Nicole Downey has an undergraduate degree in Communication Studies with a concentration in Public Relations from James Madison University. I am currently pursuing my master’s degree in Adult Education and Human Resource Development at James Madison University. I have completed coursework in Research Methods (Quantitative and Qualitative), Performance Analysis, Adult Learning, Educational Technology, and Foundations of Human Resource Development.
Dr. Noorie Kelsey Brantmeier has a Ph.D. in Adult Education and Human Resource Studies with a specialization in research methods from Colorado State University. She has a
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 75
master’s degree in social work from Washington University in St. Louis where she conducted research on social and economic development in Native American communities. Dr. Brantmeier has been a principal investigator, co-principal investigator, and/or research coordinator on studies related to the measurement of student attitudes regarding diversity in higher education; youth civic engagement; and adolescent attitudes toward violence. She holds the rank of Graduate Faculty at JMU and teaches research methods courses at both the master’s and doctoral levels.
Past and current research methods courses taught include:
PSY 840: Qualitative and Mixed Research Methods
AHRD/EDUC 630: Research Methods & Inquiry
AHRD 680/700: Reading & Research/Thesis
Cover Letter (Used in Anonymous Research)
Identification of Investigators & Purpose of Study You are being asked to participate in a research study conducted by Meganne Nicole Downey from James Madison University. The purpose of this study is to The primary concern of this survey is to develop a greater understanding of the instructional strategies of an inverted classroom’s impact on active learning goals in order to design an effective blended learning environment. Active learning goals include: affective learning (attitudes, feelings, and perceptions), behavioral learning (procedures, operations, methods, and techniques), and cognitive learning (content). This study will contribute to the researcher’s completion of her master’s research in the Adult Education/Human Resource Development program.
Research ProceduresThis study consists of an online survey that will be administered to individual participants using Qualtrics. You will be asked to provide answers to a series of questions related to your attitudes, feelings and perceptions, procedures, operations, methods and techniques, and content of in the Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE 485) course at James Madison University.
Time RequiredParticipation in this study will require 10-15 minutes of your time.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 76
Risks The investigator does not perceive more than minimal risks from your involvement in this study (that is, no risks beyond the risks associated with everyday life).
BenefitsPotential benefits from participation in this study include the focus on the impact of the instructional strategies utilized in an inverted classroom on the three major types of learning will provide educators and trainers an effective way to incorporate a successful inverted classroom.
Confidentiality The results of this research will be presented to a Research Review Committee comprised of faculty members from the College of Education. While individual responses are obtained and recorded anonymously and kept in the strictest confidence, aggregate data will be presented representing averages or generalizations about the responses as a whole. No identifiable information will be collected from the participant and no identifiable responses will be presented in the final form of this study. All data will be stored in a secure location accessible only to the researcher. The researcher retains the right to use and publish non-identifiable data. At the end of the study, all records will be destroyed.
Participation & Withdrawal Your participation is entirely voluntary. You are free to choose not to participate. Should you choose to participate, you can withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind; choosing not to participate will not affect your grade or your standing with the professor. However, once your responses have been submitted and anonymously recorded you will not be able to withdraw from the study.
Questions about the StudyIf you have questions or concerns during the time of your participation in this study, or after its completion or you would like to receive a copy of the final aggregate results of this study, please contact:
Meganne Nicole Downey Dr. Noorjehan Brantmeier
Adult Education/Human Resource Development Adult Education/Human Resource Development
Giving of ConsentI have read this cover letter and I understand what is being requested of me as a participant in this study. I freely consent to participate. I have been given satisfactory answers to my questions. I certify that I am at least 18 years of age.
The following survey intends to gather data about students' perceptions of an inverted classroom model of instruction. The information you provide will be completely anonymous because you will not supply any personal information, and you will not directly identify your answer to any
question. You will be asked a series of 11 questions pertaining to your experience in the inverted classroom Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE485).
Thank you for participating in this study.
Q1 What is your current student level at James Madison University?
Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Other ____________________
Q2 What is your current major at James Madison University? (Please fill in your response)
Q3 What is your gender?
Male Female Prefer not to respond
Q4 What best describes how you access the Internet for educational purposes? (Check all that apply)
Personal Desktop or Laptop University Desktop or Laptop Smart phone Tablet Other ____________________
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 79
Q5 Have you ever been involved in an inverted classroom prior to the Development of Materials and Programs (LTLE485) course?
Yes No I don't know
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 80
Q6 For the following statements please indicate whether you agree or disagree based on your attitudes, feelings, and preferences of an inverted classroom model of instruction.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly
Agree I enjoy
learning course content outside of the classroom.
I enjoy the online discussion boards.
I enjoy engaging in hands-on activities inside of the classroom with the help of an instructor.
Overall, I enjoy the inverted classroom model of instruction.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 81
Q7 For the following statements please indicate whether you agree or disagree based on the procedures, operations, methods and techniques of an inverted classroom model of instruction.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly
Agree Technology
is an effective way to deliver course content outside of the classroom.
Online discussion boards enhance learning.
Hands on activities in class are an effective way to enhance learning and engagement.
Overall, the inverted classroom model of instruction enhances learning.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 82
Q8 For the following statements please indicate whether you agree or disagree based on the content presented in an inverted classroom model of instruction.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly
Agree I
effectively learn the course content outside of the classroom.
I effectively learn the content through online discussion boards.
I effectively learn the course content through in-class activities with the help of an instructor.
Overall, I effectively learn the content in the inverted classroom model of instruction.
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 83
Q9 On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being very satisfied and 1 being very unsatisfied, what is your overall satisfaction level of the inverted classroom model of instruction?
______ Overall, satisfaction of the inverted classroom model of instruction
Q10 Overall, what are the major strengths of the inverted classroom model of instruction? (Please fill in your responses)
Q11 Overall, what are the major weaknesses of the inverted classroom model of instruction? (Please fill in your responses)
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF AN INVERTED CLASSROOM 84
References
Abdulwahed, M., & Nagy. Z. K. (2009). Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for
laboratory education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 283-294. Retrieved from