Abstract:

After a successful adoption of flipped classroom with Chemical Engineering Principle (CN1111FC) for non-resident students, the flipped classroom was partially implemented in the subsequent semester with Chemical Engineering Principles (CN1111) and Fluid-Solid Systems (CN3124) for residents at National University of Singapore (NUS). CN1111 and CN1111FC are offered to the first year students and CN3124 is to the second year and above. Two components of flipped classroom are online lecture videos and class activity which a group of 3 members are tasked with open-ended problems. The teaching format and assessments are similar for all three courses. The class size of CN1111FC, CN1111 and CN3124 is 28, 156 and 44, respectively. Unlike CN1111FC roster who were fully aware of the adoption, the rosters of CN1111 and CN3124 were informed about the flipped classroom approach after the enrollment. It was anticipated that the students’ experience on flipped classroom of CN1111 and CN3124 roster would be similar to that of CN1111FC which was positive overall. However, while the feedback is favorable for CN3124 roster, CN1111 feedback was on the negative side. The unexpected outcome is analyzed and explained through Vykotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) theorem, Bloom’s taxonomy and learners’ classification framework for Differentiated Instruction (DI). Several recommendations for effective adoption of flipped classroom for technically orientated courses in tertiary education are also proposed.

Keywords:

Flipped classroom, Zone of proximal development, Bloom’s taxonomy, Differentiated Instruction, Tertiary education.