An Inverted Classroom Model for a Mechanics of Materials Course

1
An Inverted ClassroomModel for a Mechanics of
Materials Course

• Jeffery S. Thomas and Timothy A. Philpot
• Civil, Architectural Environmental Engineering

2

• Inverted Classes
• - watch videos outside of class
• - work homework during class
• - do experiments during class

3

• Summary
• 1. more flexibility
• 2. lecture hall replaced by open/laboratory/comput
  er space
• 3. opportunity for learning analytics
• 4. no significant change in student performance
  yet

4
Semester Students Format
F02 W08 275 traditional
S08 F08 195 videos
W09 W10 668 traditional videos
S10 W12 519 inverted

• Previous results
• no significant difference between mean final
  exam scores
• high GPA students do 5 pts better in inverted
  format
• low GPA students do 2 pts worse in inverted
  format

5
Effect of Instructor/Format
Performance Measure Instructor/Format Condition Instructor/Format Condition
Performance Measure instructors that use traditional format in mechanics of materials instructor that uses inverted format in mechanics of materials
mean final exam score in mechanics of materials 67.5 (n 513) 66.9 (n 556)
mean class grade in structural analysis 86.1 (n 40) 86.5 (n 44)
6
Concepts
Demonstrations
Videos
Problems
Experiments
7
Google Analytics
8
Google Analytics
9
Activity Hours per Student Hours per Student
Problem solutions Problem solution videos Problem strategies Concept videos Lecture notes Demonstration videos 13.8 4.5 4.1 1.6 0.8 0.1 24.9
Working HW in class 16.4 16.4
Taking exams 10.8 10.8
Site navigation 4.6 4.6
Semester schedule Old exams Grades Policies FAQ 3.0 0.7 0.6 0.1 0.1 4.4
Total 61.1 61.1

• 61 hours of measured
• engagement per student
• Does not include
• LMS
• textbook
• MecMovies
• homework done
• outside of class
• etc

10
Multiple-Choice Exams

• 2031 Short open-response questions
• 693 Processed into multiple choice
• Variations
• 220 Categories
• 132 Enabling objectives
• 12 Terminal objectives

11
Multiple-Choice Exams
In-Class Exams Final Exams
Students 813 1394
Sections 9 20
Semesters 7 7
Question categories 145 71
Root questions 429 147
Graded questions 84,651 38,139
12
Performance Index for Each Question
13
Performance Index for Objectives
14
Ranked Categories
15
(No Transcript)
16
Student Performance Maps
17
Student Performance Maps
18
Questions? Acknowledgements Missouri ST
EdTech,many student assistants
19
(No Transcript)
20
Google Analytics to track resource usage
21
IDE 110 IDE 120 CivEng 217
22
GA-IDE 120
23
GA-IDE 120
24
GA-IDE 120
25
GA-IDE 120
26

Effect of Video
Performance Measure Video Condition Video Condition Video Condition Video Condition
Performance Measure traditional (n 50) videos (n 195) traditional videos (n 668) inverted (n 150)
mean final exam score 71.74 73.92 75.85 73.14
Effect of Ability
Performance Measure GPA group Video Condition Video Condition
Performance Measure GPA group traditional lecture (n 50) inverted (n 150)
mean final exam score high GPA 76.66 81.63
mean final exam score low GPA 66.06 63.91
27
Content Usage per Exam
page views
page views
28
Comparing Semesters
29
Navigation Patterns
page views
30
GA-IDE 110
Comparing Semesters
31
A New Way of Grading
32
(No Transcript)
33
Individual Question Performance
34
(No Transcript)
35
Things Ive been pondering
36
Does (optional) attendance matter?
37
What about students that finish early?
38
How much do students need to write down?
39
What about gender and major?
40
Class rank?
41
How have textbooks changed?
42
How have textbooks changed?
43
How have textbooks changed?
44

• Conclusions
• student performance
• student/instructor flexibility
• student/instructor satisfaction
• ability to evaluate future innovations