Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning 3/2020

20-03-2020 | Original research

How Does Flipping Classroom Foster the STEM Education: A Case Study of the FPD Model

Author: Chak-Him Fung

Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Issue 3/2020

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

STEM education is essential but challenging. Educators generally believe that both practical work and flipped learning facilitate STEM education. Practical work is useful in establishing linkages among STEM-related disciplines as well as the connections between knowledge and the real-life problems while flipped learning allows teachers to spend more in-class time on individual guidance and feedbacks. This study aims at studying the mechanism of how they could benefit STEM education and their interactions when used together. In this study, a strategy called flipping–practical–discussion was employed in a STEM lesson among twenty senior high school students in grade eleven. The research follows a qualitative design and individual interviews were conducted on three students and the teacher who conducted the lecture. The result shows that the pre-class video of flipping classroom could act as a medium in providing the pre-requisite knowledge and skills which facilitate the practical work and discussions. Although there is a lack of support in the pre-class section, the questions aroused during watching the video could serve as the raw materials for subsequent class activities, therefore keeping students more focused in the in-class session and potentially boosting the effect of the practical work and discussions.
previous article Implementing Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) Model in Flipped Learning: Advantages and Challenges
next article Adults’ Self-Regulatory Behaviour Profiles in Blended Learning Environments and Their Implications for Design

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education,30(14), 1945–1969.
Abrahams, I., & Reiss, M. (2010). Effective practical work in primary science: The role of empathy. Primary Science,113, 26–27.
Adams, C., & Dove, A. (2016). Flipping calculus: The potential influence, and the lessons learned. The Electronic Journal of Mathematics and Technology,10(3), 155–164.
Aleman, M. P. (1992). Redefining “teacher”. Educational Leadership,50(3), 97.
Asiksoy, G., & Özdamli, F. (2016). Flipped classroom adapted to the ARCS model of motivation and applied to a physics course. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education,12(6), 1589–1603.
Australian Industry Group. (2013). Lifting our science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) skills. Sydney: Author.
Baker, J. W. (2000). The “classroom flip”: Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side. Paper presented at the 11th international conference on college teaching and learning, Jacksonville, FL.
Baumgartner, E., & Reiser, B. (1997). Inquiry through design: Situating and supporting inquiry through design projects in high school science classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Oak Brook, IL.
Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects on students’ learning: A preliminary meta-analysis. Journal of STEM Education,12(5/6), 23–37.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Read every student in every class every day. Washington: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bhagat, K. K., Chang, C. N., & Chang, C. Y. (2016). The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school. Educational Technology & Society,19(3), 134–142.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In 120th ASEE national conference and exposition, Atlanta, GA (Paper ID 6219). Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education.
Breiner, J., Harkness, M., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics,112(1), 3–11.
Butz, W. P., Kelly, T. K., Adamson, D. M., Bloom, G. A., Fossum, D., & Gross, M. E. (2004). Will the scientific and technology workforce meet the requirements of the federal government?. Pittsburgh, PA: RAND.
Clark, K. R. (2015). The effects of the flipped model of instruction on student engagement and performance in the secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educators Online,12(1), 91–115.
Crismond, D. (2001). Learning and using science ideas when doing investigate-and-redesign tasks: A study of naive, novice, and expert designers doing constrained and scaffolded design work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(7), 791–820.
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics,69(9), 970–977.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Will 21st-century schools really be different? Education Digest,60, 4–8.
Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development,61(4), 563–580.
Delozier, S. J., & Rhodes, M. G. (2017). Flipped classrooms: A review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational Psychology Review,29(1), 141–151.
Dove, A., & Dove, E. (2017). Flipping preservice elementary teachers’ mathematics anxieties. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education,17(3), 312–335.
Drake, S. (1978). Galileo at Work (pp. 19–20). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Entwistle, N. J., & Entwistle, A. (1991). Contrasting forms of understanding for degree examinations: The student experience and its implications. Higher Education,23(3), 225–227.
Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., Dershimer, R. C., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Design-based science and real-world problem-solving. International Journal of Science Education,27(7), 855–879.
Gallagher, J. J. (1987). A summary of research in science education. Science Education,71(3), 277–384.
Garrison, D. R. (1990). An analysis and evaluation of audio teleconferencing to facilitate education at a distance. The American Journal of Distance Education,4(3), 13–24.
Geng, J., Jong, M. S. Y., & Chai, C. S. (2018). Hong Kong teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns about STEM education. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,28(1), 35–45.
Giere, R. N. (1991). Understanding scientific reasoning (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior,47(1), 109–114.
Graesser, A. C., Halpern, D. F., & Hakel, M. (2008). 25 Principles of learning. Washington, DC: Task force on lifelong learning at work and at home.
Graziano, K. J., & Hall, J. D. (2017). Flipping math in a secondary classroom. In Society for information technology & teacher education international conference (pp. 192–200). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Gross, B., Marinari, M., Hoffman, M., DeSimone, K., & Burke, P. (2015). Flipped @ SBU: Student satisfaction and the college classroom. Educational Research Quarterly,39(2), 36–52.
Grypp, L., & Luebeck, J. (2015). Rotating solids and flipping instruction. The Mathematics Teacher,109(3), 186–193.
Herschbach, D. R. (2011). The STEM initiative: Constraints and challenges. Journal of STEM Teacher Education,48(1), 96–122.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research,52(2), 201–217.
Huber, E., & Werner, A. (2016). A review of the literature on flipping the STEM classroom: Preliminary findings. In 33rd international conference of innovation, practice and research in the use of educational technologies in tertiary education-ASCILITE 2016-show me the learning.
Hwang, G. J., & Lai, C. L. (2017). Facilitating and bridging out-of-class and in-class learning: An interactive e-book-based flipped learning approach for math courses. Educational Technology & Society,20(1), 184–197.
Jang, S. & Anderson, C. W. (2004). Different ways of coping with scientific knowledge in elementary science classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, BC.
Kanelopoulos, J., Papanikolaou, K. A., & Zalimidis, P. (2017). Flipping the classroom to increase students’ engagement and interaction in a mechanical engineering course on machine design. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP),7(4), 19–34.
Keefe, J. (2007). What is personalization? Phi Delta Kappan,89(3), 217–223.
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education,3(1), 1–11.
Kettle, M. (2013). Flipped physics. Physics Education,48(5), 593–596.
Kontra, C., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). Embodied learning across the life span. Topics in Cognitive Science,4(4), 731–739.
Kosko, K. W., & Miyazaki, Y. (2012). The effect of student discussion frequency on fifth-grade students’ mathematics achievement in U.S. schools. Journal of Experimental Education,80(2), 173–195.
Lavatelli, C. (1973). Piaget’s theory applied to an early childhood curriculum. Boston: American Science and Engineering Inc.
Le, X., Ma, G. G., & Duva, A. W. (2015). Testing the flipped classroom approach in engineering dynamics class. In Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE annual conference, Seattle, WA (Vol. 9).
Lee, B. (2017). TELL us ESP in a flipped classroom. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education,13(8), 4995–5007.
Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., & Lucas, D. (2008). Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry. Cognitive Development,23(4), 512–529.
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017a). A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education possible solutions and recommendations for future research. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning,12(4), 1–22.
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017b). Using “first principles of instruction” to design secondary school mathematics flipped classroom: The findings of two exploratory studies. Educational Technology & Society,20(1), 222–236.
Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Chen, G. (2017). Toward a set of design principles for mathematics flipped classrooms: A synthesis of research in mathematics education. Educational Research Review,22, 50–73.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual series in educational innovation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
McLaughlin, J. E., White, P. J., Khanova, J., & Yuriev, E. (2016). Flipped classroom implementation: A case report of two higher education institutions in the United States and Australia. Computers in the Schools,33(1), 24–37.
McMillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Addressing performance and equity of a design-based, systems approach for teaching science in eighth grade. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education,97(1), 71–85.
Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. Paper prepared for the meeting High school science laboratories: Role and vision. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Moore, T., Stohlmann, M., Wang, H., Tank, K., Glancy, A., & Roehrig, G. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 35–60). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
Mzoughi, T. (2015). An investigation of student web activity in a “flipped” introductory physics class. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,191, 235–240.
Nathan, M., Srisurichan, R., Walkington, C., Wolfgram, M., Williams, C., & Alibali, M. (2013). Building cohesion across representations: A mechanism for STEM integration. Journal of Engineering Education,102(1), 77–116.
Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. J. (2003). Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal,40(4), 905–928.
National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington: National Academies Press.
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education,25, 85–95.
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, S. (Eds.). (2002). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Research Center.
Penner, D., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences,7(3–4), 429–449.
Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: Designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,34(2), 125–143.
Pfennig, A. (2016). Inverting the classroom in an introductory material science course. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences,228, 32–38.
Pierce, R., & Fox, J. (2012). Instructional design and assessment: Vodcasts and activelearning exercises in a “flipped classroom” model of a renal pharmacotherapy module. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education,76(10), 1–5.
Ramsden, P. (1988). Improving learning: New perspectives. London: Kogan Page.
Rennie, L., Wallace, J., & Venville, G. (2012). Exploring curriculum integration: Why integrate? In L. Rennie, G. Venville, & J. Wallace (Eds.), Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Issues, reflections, and ways forward (pp. 1–11). New York: Routledge.
Roehl, A., Reddy, A. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family & Consumer Science,105(2), 44–49.
Rogers, W. D., & Ford, R. (1997). Factors that affect student attitude toward biology. Bioscene,23(2), 3–5.
Sadler, P., Coyle, H., & Schwartz, M. (2000). Engineering competitions in the middle school classroom: Key elements in developing effective design challenges. Journal of the Learning Sciences,9(3), 299–327.
Sahin, A., Cavlazogula, B., & Zeytuncu, Y. E. (2015). Flipping a college calculus course: A Case study. Educational Technology & Society,18(3), 142–152.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher,68(4), 20–26.
Shnai, I. (2017). Systematic review of challenges and gaps in flipped classroom implementation: Toward future model enhancement. In European conference on e-learning (pp. 484–490). Academic Conferences International Limited.
Sithole, A., Chiyaka, E. T., McCarthy, P., Mupinga, D. M., Bucklein, B. K., & Kibirige, J. (2017). Student attraction, persistence and retention in stem programs: Successes and continuing challenges. Higher Education Studies,7(1), 46.
Sitole, K. S. (2016). A case study of two experienced science teachers’ use of practical (Masters Research project). Retrieved from Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETD) in WIReDSpace (Wits Institutional Repository on DSpace).
Sun, C. Y., & Wu, Y. T. (2016). Analysis of learning achievement and teacher–student interactions in flipped and conventional classrooms. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,17(1), 79–99.
Talley, C. P., & Scherer, S. (2013). The enhanced flipped classroom: Increasing academic performance with student-recorded lectures and practice testing in a “flipped” STEM course. The Journal of Negro Education,82(3), 339–347.
Thair, M., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). A review of teacher development reforms in indonesian secondary science: The effectiveness of practical work in biology. Research in Science Education,27(4), 581–597.
Thomas, B., & Watters, J. (2015). Perspectives on Australian, Indian and Malaysian approaches to STEM education. International Journal of Educational Development,45, 42–53.
Van Vliet, E. A., Winnips, J. C., & Brouwer, N. (2015). Flipped-class pedagogy enhances student metacognition and collaborative-learning strategies in higher education but effect does not persist. CBE Life Science Education,14(3), 1–10.
Vilaythong, T. (2011). The role of practical work in physics education in Lao PDR. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Swedish Dissertations.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978a). Thought and word. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of Vygotsky, L. S.: Volume 1 problems of general psychology including the volume thinking and speech (pp. 243–285). New York: Plenum Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978b). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education,8(2), 6–29.
Warter-Perez, N., & Dong, J. (2012). Flipping the classroom: How to embed inquiry and design projects into a digital engineering lecture. In Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE PSW section conference (Vol. 39). Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education.
Wasserman, N. H., Quint, C., Norris, S. A., & Carr, T. (2017). Exploring flipped classroom instruction in calculus III. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,15(3), 545–568.
White, D. W. (2014). What is STEM education and why is it important. Florida Association of Teacher Educators Journal,1(14), 1–9.
White, R. T., & Tisher, R. P. (1986). Research on natural sciences. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 874–904). New York: Macmillan.
Yildiz Durak, H. (2018). Flipped learning readiness in teaching programming in middle schools: Modelling its relation to various variables. Journal of Computer Assisted learning,34(6), 939–959.
Zengin, Y. (2017). Investigating the use of the Khan Academy and mathematics software with a flipped classroom approach in mathematics teaching. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,20(2), 89–100.
Metadata
Title
How Does Flipping Classroom Foster the STEM Education: A Case Study of the FPD Model
Author
Chak-Him Fung
Publication date
20-03-2020
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Electronic ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09443-9

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

Technology, Knowledge and Learning 3/2020 Go to the issue

Original research

Adults’ Self-Regulatory Behaviour Profiles in Blended Learning Environments and Their Implications for Design

Original research

Students Vote: A Comparative Study of Student Perceptions of Three Popular Web-Based Student Response Systems

Original research

The Role of Achievement Goals and Self-regulated Learning Behaviors in Clinical Reasoning

Original research

A Study on the Actual Use of Digital Competence in the Practicum of Education Degree

OriginalPaper

Multiple Agent Designs in Conversational Intelligent Tutoring Systems

Original research

Online Project-Based Learning and Formative Assessment

Premium Partners

    Image Credits