The flipped classroom is not a new concept in teaching nor is it hard to obtain successful stories of professors’ experiences with this type of pedagogy. The account presented here of a junior level fluid mechanics course in a mechanical engineering department deviates from the traditional by focusing on an outcome of the flipped classroom that may have previously been overlooked: the discouragement of cheating. This paper discusses the relationship between the method of course material delivery and the consequential impact on overall student performance with an emphasis on cheating. Specifically, the questions addressed in this research are: In a time of rampant academic misconduct, does the flipped classroom structure inhibit students’ ability to cheat? Does increasing active learning within the format of the flipped classroom further increase the students’ accountability for the course material? Test scores collected in the flipped classroom and a more traditional lecture format are presented for comparison. Additionally, student surveys focused on academic misconduct under different delivery methods are summarized and the outcomes of student perception of the inverted delivery method presented. Suggestions to faculty seeking to try this instructional method are also given to help smooth the transition from traditional methods. Introduction In the traditional undergraduate engineering classroom one will typically find an instructor presenting new material via lectures, which may also include demonstrations, example problems, and other active learning techniques. An increasingly popular course structure, the flipped classroom, aims to maximize the amount of in-class time dedicated to active learning. It is noted that the flipped classroom is also known as an inverted classroom, an inside-out classroom, or this pedagogical approach can be combined with more traditional in-class lectures in numerous varieties of a hybrid approach. As aptly stated by Lage et al., in the flipped classroom events that would typically occur during class time are moved to take place outside of class and vice versa. In order to accommodate the increased class time for student-centered activities in a flipped classroom the traditional in-class lecture component is minimized or removed altogether. Students then receive lecture material typically through computer-based videos and instructional activities to be completed prior to attending class. A review of the literature reveals that instructors are utilizing the flipped classroom in a variety of undergraduate engineering courses from first-year to senior year and even programming and mathematics courses. Compelling evidence for the efficacy of this pedagogical approach comes from research that concludes that watching video lectures can be as effective at conveying information to a student as having them sit through a lecture in-person. As described by Bishop and Verleger in their comprehensive survey of published research on the flipped classroom, students are more likely to watch assigned videos outside of class that results in better preparation than assigned textbook readings. If the sage wisdom and course content within an instructor’s lecture can be effectively delivered outside of class, it then follows that more in-class time is available for the instructor to act as a guide during student-centered learning activities that enhance the quality of P ge 26533.2 the classroom experience and increase student learning. The various active learning methods that can be more frequently utilized include problem-based learning, peer-assisted learning, cooperative learning, collaborative learning and peer tutoring. Thus, a flipped classroom has the potential to not only improve student learning outside of class, but within the classroom as well. The flipped classroom represents a significant departure from the typical undergraduate engineering student experience, one which has the potential for a variety of student impacts. One such impact that has not been examined in the literature, to the authors’ best knowledge, is how the flipped classroom affects academic misconduct. It has been reported that 74% of undergraduate engineering students admit to committing some form of cheating, a percentage which is second only to business majors. Passow et al. report that cheating is more likely on lower stakes assessments, such as homework, than higher stakes assessments. This is supported by results showing that 90-95% of engineering students are able to find access to textbook problem solutions not distributed by the instructor. A flipped classroom structure that moves lower stake assessments into the classroom and under the supervision of the instructor could present one means of reducing misconduct. The topic of how to prevent academic dishonesty from occurring has been examined by a number of studies. When students feel that they are receiving poor instruction with confusing lectures, material whose usefulness is not recognized, an unreasonable workload and see the instructor as indifferent to student learning they are more likely to rationalize misconduct. This suggests that increased instructional quality may result in lower rates of cheating. When an instructor makes clear the relevance of the material and learning objectives research shows that cheating is reduced. These actions may ultimately increase intrinsic student motivation for learning the material that has been related to a lower propensity for cheating. In a flipped classroom, it is possible that the additional in-class activities will aid in clarifying relevance, while recorded lectures allow a student to re-watch sections which were confusing at first to increase their understanding which would suggest lower motivation for cheating. The aim of the current study is to examine how the flipped classroom organization affects academic misconduct as compared to a traditional classroom. The hypothesis under consideration is that flipping the classroom will inhibit opportunities and temptation for cheating among students that may result in less cheating. Flipped versus Traditional course delivery Traditional Class: Structure For this study, a traditional class is considered to be on that delivers course content primarily through lecturing. Traditional classes meet three times a week for 50 minutes at a time. Homework is assigned and turned in once a week and typically 2-3 midterms with a comprehensive final exam make up the main assessment for the course. Flipped Class: Structure Two sections (18-20 students each) of a junior level Fluid Mechanics class in a mechanical engineering department were flipped in order to increase student engagement. The class was P ge 26533.3 traditionally taught on a Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule for fifty minutes each day but was moved to Tuesday and Thursday and the class time extended to 75 minutes. The longer duration allowed for in-class activities and projects to be part of the class time. Moodle, an online delivery system, similar to Blackboard, developed through the University of Minnesota system, was used as the primary delivery method for online content in the course. Electronic learning components of the class were delivered via Moodle through the use of learning modules. The learning modules provided the fundamental information needed by the students to be ready to tackle the homework problems in class. The Moodle site was also used to indicate which problems would be discussed during class time and due by the beginning of the next time the group met. Class time was always started with a 5-10 minute recap of the important points from the learning modules. This short lecture allowed the instructor to add some additional information or nuances that were not covered in enough detail in the online content. This was also a time where students had the opportunity to ask any questions they might have had about the material. After the short lecture, students would begin to work on the homework problems of the day. At least once a week an in-class activity was also incorporated into class time. The activities took about 10-15 minutes to complete and groups would cycle through the activity while continuing to work on homework. Group projects reinforced key equations that were learned throughout the semester: the Bernoulli equation, Linear Momentum equation, Bernoulli with losses, and a final project was given to include pump curves. Other forms of assessment included two midterm exams and a final exam. In-class homework consisted of problems taken from the course textbook, ‘Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics’ by Munson, Okiishi, Huebsch, and Rothmayer. Homework was assigned to be due at the next class period; this resulted in two shortened homework assignments per week. Two to three problems assigned on Tuesday were due on Thursday and three to four problems assigned on Thursday were due the following Tuesday. Solutions were posted to Moodle after grading was complete. In-class exercises consisted of activities that could be completed as a small portion of the class. These activities were designed to demonstrate the concepts the students were currently learning in the online content as well as provide an environment to see concepts from the homework.
