Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

University Students' Perception on the Flipped-learning-based Introductory Physics Course in which Class Hour are Divided into Lectures and Group Problem Solving

강의와 그룹문제풀이가 균형을 이루는 플립러닝 기반 일반물리학 강좌에 대한 대학생의 인식

  • Received : 2018.06.19
  • Accepted : 2018.08.31
  • Published : 2018.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recently, flipped learning has been paid much attention as one of the improvement methods of teaching and learning at university level. Few studies investigated the effects of flipped learning in general physics classes. However, in order to be successfully established and spread new attempts such as flipped learning, it is necessary to investigate in detail the effect of flipped learning and the way it is perceived by students in accordance with other variables such as student's background and characteristic. In this study, we investigated differences in students' perception on the flipped learning and their achievement according to their background and characteristic in flipped-learning-based introductory physics course in which class hours are divided into lecture and group problem solving equally. Students' achievement was more influenced by their readiness before the beginning of the semester than their time consuming for learning during the semester. Students generally had a very positive perception of the new way of flipped-learning-based physics teaching. However, students of insufficient prior learning, or relatively not-hard learner agreed with careful selection of subjects rather than the overall expansion of flipped learning.

최근에 대학 수준의 교수학습 강의 개선의 한 방안으로 플립러닝이 주목받고 있다. 또 일반물리학 수업에서 플립러닝을 시행하여 그 효과를 분석한 연구들도 발표되고 있다. 그런데 플립러닝과 같은 새로운 시도들이 성공적으로 안착, 확산되기 위해서는, 배경과 특징에 따라 학생들에게 플립러닝이 어떻게 받아들여지고, 어떤 효과를 낳는지에 대한 보다 상세한 탐색이 필요하다. 본 연구에서는 강의와 그룹문제풀이가 균형을 이루는 플립러닝에 기반한 일반물리학 강좌에서 학생들의 배경과 특징에 따른 플립러닝에 대한 인식과 성취도를 조사하였다. 학생들의 성취도는 강좌 수강 중 학습시간보다는 학기 시작 전 준비도에 더 영향을 받았다. 또 학생들은 대체로 플립러닝 기반 일반물리학 교수학습이라는 새로운 방식에 대해 매우 긍정적인 인식을 갖고 있었다. 그렇지만 상대적으로 선행학습이 부족하거나, 학습량이 적은 학생들은 플립러닝의 전반적인 확대시행보다 주의 깊은 과목선정을 통한 선별적 시행에 찬성하는 입장을 보였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Baker, J. W. (2000). The "Classroom Flip": Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side (pp. 9-17). Jacksonville, FL: Florida Community College
  2. Bates, S., & Galloway, R. (2012, April). The inverted classroom in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a case study. Proceedings of the HEA STEM learning and teaching conference, London.
  3. Bergmann, J.. & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
  4. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
  5. Choi, J., Na, J., & Song, J (2015). Developing an Instrument for Analysing Students' Behavioral Engagement in School Science Classroom. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(2), 247-258. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0247
  6. Choi, M-J., & Jeong, J. (2015). The effect on student achievement, lesson preparation, and behavior related to the class caused by flipped learning lectures in physics. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 65(11), 1110-1115. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.65.1110
  7. Crouch, C. H., Fagen, A. P., Callan, J. P., & Mazur, E. (2004). Classroom demonstrations: Learning tools or entertainment?. Am. J. Phys. 72(6), 835-838. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1707018
  8. Etkina, E., & Van Heuvelen, A. (2004). Investigative science learning environment (p. 12-14). Forum on Education of the American Physical Society, 2004, Spring issue, Florida International University, Miami, FL.
  9. Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 54-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452876
  10. Fagen, A. P., Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2002). Peer instruction: Results from a range of classrooms. The physics teacher, 40(4), 206-209. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1474140
  11. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher 30, 141-158. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2343497
  12. Karelina, A., & Etkina, E. (2007). Acting like a physicist: Student approach study to experimental design. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020106. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020106
  13. Kim, E., & Lee, Y. (2015). A Study on international cases for application of flipped classroom in university. Lifelong Learning Society, 11, 115-137.
  14. Kim, N., Chun, B., & Choi, J. (2014). A case study of flipped learning at colledge level: Focused on motivation and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Technology, 30, 467-492. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.30.3.467
  15. Lasry, N., Mazur, E., & Watkins, J. (2008). Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. Am. J. Phys. 76(11), 1066-1069. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2978182
  16. Lee, E., Kim, J. B., & Lee, J. S. (2013). Exploration of peer instruction based on a case study involving science teachers. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 63(1), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.63.17
  17. Lorenzo, M., Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2006). Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom. Am. J. Phys. 74(2), 118-122. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2162549
  18. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual (Series in Educational Innovation). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  19. McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (2002). Tutorials in introductory physics. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  20. McDermott, L. C., Shaffer, P. S., & Somers, M. D. (1994). Research as a guide for teaching introductory mechanics: An illustration in the context of the Atwood's machine. Am. J. Phys. 62(1), 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17740
  21. Shaffer, P. S., & McDermott, L. C. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity (Part I): Investigation of student understanding. Am. J. Phys. 60, 994-1003. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17003
  22. Turpen, C., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2010). The construction of different classroom norms during Peer Instruction: Students perceive differences. Phy. Rev. ST Phys. Edu. Res. 6(2), 020123. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020123
  23. Van Vliet, E. A., Winnips, J. C., & Brouwer, N. (2015). Flipped-class pedagogy enhances students metacognition and collaborativelearning strategies in higher education but effect does not persist. Life Science Education, 14, 1-10.
  24. You, H., Im, H., Go, J., Shin, H., & Park, S. (2011). National survey of student engagement in Korean universities (Research report RR 2011-13). Seoul: Korean Education Development Institute.

Cited by

  1. 플립러닝의 동영상 활용시 제안과 교육적 가치 고찰 vol.10, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.22156/cs4smb.2020.10.06.087