Abstract:

In order to meet students’ needs and fully engage them into the topic of academic teaching, a flipped learning approach has to be considered a suitable arrangement for higher education. Introduced roughly three decades ago and referring to the paradigm of learning (Barr & Tagg, 1995; Biggs & Tang 2011) the blended learning approach has become a trendsetting instructional design not only for higher education. A great variety of best practice examples has proven its versatile applicability.

The paper presents a case study of another example which will put the variety of students’ requirements into perspective.
In reference to the approach of design-based research (Euler & Sloane 2014) a flipped pilot seminar had been designed in order to explore students’ learning experiences: to find out which design-related events relate to which responses and actions of students. The applied instructional design based on a common understanding of flipped learning (Abeysekera & Dawson, 2015) and on the task-based approach of task orientation (Weidlich & Spannagel 2014). 10 of 13 weekly classes were augmented by flipped learning. In 2017 it was implemented for 109 2nd-year students in pre-service teacher education at Leipzig University/ Germany.

Learning experiences are individually identifiable and refer to significant events, which are evaluated (assessment) and result in a response. Correspondingly, qualitative data about students learning experiences within the flipped setting were collected. Selected students took part in four group discussion. Plus, all students were assigned an individually written experience report. The content of audio-recordings and text documents was systematically analyzed in order to answer the research question.

The poster especially illustrates findings and selected results to exemplify different types of design-related events linked to students’ responses and study activities in a specific flipped setting. They point out implications for flipped teaching in higher education which are put up for discussion.

References:
[1] Abeysekera, L.&Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), pp. 1-14.
[2] Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education. Change, 27 (6), 12-25. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40165284
[3] Biggs, J. B. & Tang, C. (2009). Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does, 3. Ed., Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill.
[4] Euler; D. (2010): Didaktische Herausforderungen zwischen Programmatik und Implementierung (Didactic challenges between program and implementation). In: Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik (Journal of vocational and business education), 106/3 (2010), Stuttgart; Steiner
[5] Weidlich, J. & Spannagel, C. (2014). Die Vorbereitungsphase im Flipped Classroom. Vorlesungsvideos versus Aufgaben. In K. Rummler (Ed.),Lernräume gestalten – Bildungskontexte vielfältig denken (pp. 237-248). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.

Keywords:

Flipped learning, case study, learning experiences, higher education, instructional design, flipped classroom.