1887

Abstract

Despite the wide spread of modern teaching techniques such as the flipped classroom and blended learning, most still provide one-way feedback, from the instructor to the student. A new teaching approach – the micro-Adaptive Instruction (mAI) – isa presented in this paper. Through mAI the instructor can adapt lecture content based on student feedback and additional detailed information on their learning progress. mAI is mainly based on a multimedia platform that delivers the course material, and monitors and tracks students’ activities. The instructor is now aware of the specific topics that need to be addressed and clarified, so the lectures can be carried out more efficiently. This new approach has been tested and demonstrated on a module of Chemical Engineering Fluid Operations course (CHEN 304) at Texas A&M University at Qatar. Three evaluation metrics were implemented during and at the end of the demonstration. All metrics showed improvement at both the comprehension level and perception of the students. Around 80% of the students agreed that the collected information helped the instructor to properly adapt the lectures to their needs, while 87% believed that the platform enhanced their understanding. On average, students spent 34 active minutes on the platform while 23% spent more than 60 minutes. In spite of all the positive feedback and impact of this approach, it should be noted that significant effort might be necessary to upgrade existing teaching material to the level of the presented platform. On the other hand, this is a process that can take place gradually or even be directly adopted by educational publishers.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.5339/qproc.2015.elc2014.13
2015-08-29
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/qproc/2015/4/qproc.2015.elc2014.13.html?itemId=/content/papers/10.5339/qproc.2015.elc2014.13&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Corno L, Snow RE. Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed, 1986;605629.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Corno L. On teaching adaptively. Educational Psychologist. 2008; 43::161173.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Angelo TA, Cross KP. Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers 1993.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Felder RM. How About a Quick One? Chemical Engineering Education. 1992;26.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Hannafin MJ, Hill JR, Land SM. Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implications. Contemporary Education. 1997; 68::9499.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Felder RM. Random thoughts. Hang in there! dealing with student resistance to learner-centered teaching. Chemical Engineering Education. 2011; 45::131132.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Kim MK, Kim SM, Khera O, Getman J. The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education. 2014; 22::3750, 7.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davies RS, Dean DL, Ball N. Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2013; 61::563580.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bonk CJ, Graham CR. San Francisco, Calif.: Pfeiffer; [Chichester: John Wiley, distributor] The handbook of blended learning: global perspectives, local designs. 1st ed. 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Swartz B, Velegol SB, Laman JA. Three approaches to flipping CE courses: Faculty perspectives and suggestions. in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Lam J, Lau N, Shim C, Cheung SKS. Design and development process for blended learning courses. International Journal of Innovation and Learning. 2013; 13::322338.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen J-M, Chen M-C, Sun YS. A tag based learning approach to knowledge acquisition for constructing prior knowledge and enhancing student reading comprehension. Computers & Education. 2014; 70::256268, 1.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Lian Y. Adaptive teaching for large classes. In International Conference on Engineering Education. Valencia, Spain 2003.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hughes G. Using blended learning to increase learner support and improve retention. Teaching in Higher Education. 2007; 12::349363.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fraij F, Al-Dmour A, Al-Hashemi R, Musa A. An evolving recommender-based framework for virtual learning communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities. 2012; 8::322332.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Watson J, Strayer D. Supertaskers: Profiles in extraordinary multitasking ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2010; 17:479:485. 2010/08/01.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Caldwell JE. Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sciences Education. 2007; 6::920.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kolb DA. Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. 1984.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. TAMUQ-CHEN. ABET Student Outcomes for Chemcial Engineering Program, Texas A&M University at Qatar. 2014, July;. Available: http://chen.qatar.tamu.edu/About/Pages/StudentOutcomes.aspx .
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kakosimos KE, Mihailidi E. European Workshop on Teaching Safety in Chemical Engineering. Chemical Engineering Research and Design. 2010; 88::iiiiv.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.5339/qproc.2015.elc2014.13
Loading
/content/papers/10.5339/qproc.2015.elc2014.13
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error