Flipping a Chemical Engineering Module Using an Evidence-based Teaching Approach

Flipping a Chemical Engineering Module Using an Evidence-based Teaching Approach

S. CHEAH, H. Lee, D. SALE (2016).  Flipping a Chemical Engineering Module Using an Evidence-based Teaching Approach. 19.

This paper shares the approach taken for the Diploma in Chemical Engineering (DCHE) to redesign a Year 3 core module entitled Plant Safety and Loss Prevention, using an evidence-based teaching approach delivered via a flipped classroom blended learning format. While the research will need further iterations and substantive evaluation, the authors are confident that the overall approach, in which the affordances of technology are utilized through the creative applications of sound pedagogic practices and process (e.g., methods that work best and validated cognitive science principles of learning) is the most fruitful path towards highly effective and creative professional practices.

In the first part of the paper, we outline the pedagogic basis and rationale for using an evidence-based teaching approach, as well as the current framing of a flip classroom blended format. We started with a theoretical perspective that effective and efficient blended learning design should follow certain broad heuristics, for example: (1) Good learning design is always grounded on evidence-based practice, incorporating Core Principles of Learning, (2) Information-communication technologies are used strategically and creatively to enhance specific aspects of the learning process; and (3) The completed blended learning design maximizes the affordances of a range of learning modes and mediums. This pedagogic design model guided the development of the flip classroom lessons, integrating the online components to the face-to-face sessions, seeking to maximize the affordances of both delivery modes to optimize student learning (e.g., attainment level and intrinsic interest).

Secondly, we outline our model for teaching this module, which derived from our earlier large scale implementation of the Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate (CDIO) educational framework. The model was developed by drawing a parallel between the different stages of the lifecycle of a typical chemical process plant with the CDIO process of conceiving, designing, implementing and operating a product of system. We teach this module through presenting a range of chemical process hazards at different stages of a plant lifecycle. Students are to apply their knowledge and thinking skills to identify and diagnose the causes of such hazards and potential risks posed, and subsequently to select appropriate strategies and tools to eliminate or mitigate the impact of these hazards. Hence, through this process, students learn how to conceive and design effective preventative strategies to enhance chemical plant safety.

In the final part of the paper, we present our evaluation data to date, from a survey conducted to evaluate students' learning experience in flipped classroom, including their understanding of pre-recorded lectures, use of case studies, engagement in classroom activities, use of graphic organizer, weeks needed to get used to flipped classroom, and of course, overall perception of flipped classroom. We also share the key pedagogic learning points, challenges faced, and potential ways to further both research and practice in this exciting new educational arena.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland, June 12-16 2016

Authors (New): 
Hui-Bee Lee
Dennis SALE
Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore
Evidence-based Approach
Flipped Classroom
Chemical Engineering
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 8
Ambrose, S.A., Bridges, M.D., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M.C. and Norman, M.K. (2010). How Learning Works – Seven Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching, John Wiley & Sons. : 
Boettcher, J.V. (2006). The Rise of Student Performance Content, Campus Technology, accessed at http://campustechnology.com/articles/2006/02/the-rise-of-student-performance-content.aspx : 
Buckley, S. (2009). The Importance of Evidence-based Practice, Down Syndrome Research and Practice, Vol. 12, Issue 3, pp.165-167 : 
Carpenter, S.K. (2012). Testing Enhances the Transfer of Learning, Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 21, pp.279–283. : 
Cheah, S.M. and H.B. Lee (2015). Module Review and Redesign via Self-Evaluation using CDIO Standards, Proceedings of the 11th International CDIO Conference, June 8-10; Chengdu, Sichuan, P.R. China : 
Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able To Do. Jossey-Bass, San-Francisco. : 
Dziuban C.D., Hartman, J.L. & Moskal, P.D. (2004). Blended Learning, EDUCAUSE Centre for Applied Research: Research Bulletin, 7 : 
Fulton, K. (2012). Upside Down and Inside Out: Flip Your Classroom to Improve Student Learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), pp.12–17.: 
Garrison, D. R. & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guideline. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. : 
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning. Routledge, New York. : 
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning For Teachers: Maximizing Impact On Learning. Routledge, London. : 
Hattie, J. & Yates, G. C. R., (2014). Visible Learning and the Science of How we Learn. Routledge, New York. : 
Herreid, C.F. and Schiller, N.A. (2013). Case Studies and the Flipped Classroom, Journal of College Science Teaching, National Science Teachers Association, pp.62-66. : 
Mansell, W. (2008). Research reveals teaching's Holy Grail. TES Newspaper on 21 November. : 
Marzano, R. J., et al., (2007). Designing and Teaching Learning Goals and Objectives: Classroom Strategies That Work. Marzano Research Laboratory, Colorado. : 
Mayer, R.E. & Alexander, P. A. (2011). Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction. Routledge, London. : 
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M. & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies : 
Murray, D., Koziniec, T. and McGill, T. (2015). Student Perceptions of Flipped Learning, Proceedings of the 17th Australasian Computer Education Conference (ACE 2015), January 27-30; Sydney, Australia. : 
Oliver, R. (2007). Describing ICT-based learning designs that promote quality learning outcomes. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe, Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing and Delivering e-Learning. Routledge, London. : 
Petty, G. (2009). Evidence-Based Teaching: A Practical Approach. Nelson Thornes, Cheltenham. : 
Robinson, D. H. & Schraw, G. (2008). A Need For Quality Research In E-Learning. In D. H. Robinson, & G. Schraw, Recent Innovations in Educational Technology That Facilitate Student Learning. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC. : 
Rohrer, D., Taylor, K. and Sholar, B. (2010). Tests Enhance the Transfer of Learning, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory and Cognition, Vol 36, No.1, pp.233-239 : 
Sale, D. (2015). Creative Teaching: An Evidence-Based Approach. New York: Springer. : 
Sallis, E. & Hingley, P. (1991). College Quality Assurance Systems in Mendip Paper D20, Coombe Lodge, Bristol. : 
Slavin, R.E. (2008). Perspectives on Evidence-based Research in Education – What Works? Issues in Synthesizing Educational Program Evaluations, Educational Researcher, Vol.37, No.1, pp.5-14. : 
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J., (1999). The Teaching Gap. Free Press, New York. : 
Waldrop, J. B. & Bowden, M. A. (2015). Best Practices for Flipping the College Classroom. Routledge: New York. : 
Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why Don't Students Like School: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. : 
Go to top