Students’ Perceptions of the Effect of Flipping Online Classes Using a Synchronous Interactive Online Tool

Abstract

Online instruction is a growing field, but there are concerns about lack of student engagement with mastery of content. Researchers at a small, private, southern university were concerned about increasing student engagement with online course content. A synchronous interactive online tool (SIOT) was added to six sections of online graduate education courses. Data was collected and analyzed from the university administered end of the course survey questions asking students to rate their course learning. Student survey responses were compared from courses without a SIOT, courses where a SIOT was used for office hours, and courses where a SIOT was used for assignments. The differences in the question means from end of the course survey without the SIOT and those where the SIOT was used for office hours were not significant. However, when the SIOT was used to provide instruction related to student assignments, the data from the question responses were significantly more positive. Students 1) became more confident; 2) gained an excellent understanding of the concepts; 3) gained significant knowledge; 4) learned to analyze and critically evaluate; and 5) learned to apply course concepts to solve problems. Consequently it became evident that the implementation of the SIOT did not have a significant effect. The important component that impacted students' perception of their content understanding was the way in which the SIOT was used within the online course.

Flipping Online Analytics Classes: Achieving Parity with Their Face‐To‐Face Counterparts

“…Reports of flipped online classes are not extensive and primarily show partial use of the full “flipped” structure. Carver, Todd, Hahn, and Mukherjee (2013) added a synchronous interactive in‐line tool to their existing online graduate education courses. When the tool was used to provide instruction related to student assignments, student response was significantly more positive than when the tool was not used.…”

Online vs. Face-to-Face Delivery of Information Technology Courses: Students' Assessment

“…Instructors are more effective when they are student centered, expert, enthusiast and ethical (Carver et al, 2013). We do believe, however, that it is the preparedness of the instructors, their respect for the students, their command of the subject matter, and their availability to the students, that make a difference.…”

“…Furthermore, Ng (2007) recognized that for effective on-line interaction between tutors and students, the technology tool should have low overhead in terms of the learning curve and the limitations on student-student interaction as well as student-tutor interaction. A study by Carver, Todd, Hahn, and Mukherjee (2013) found that the implementation of a synchronous interactive online tool by itself did not have a significant effect on students' learning. They found that the way the online tool is implemented is what made the difference.…”

“…They found that the way the online tool is implemented is what made the difference. For instance, when a synchronous interactive online tool was used to provide instructions related to students' assignments, the students became more confident, gained better understanding of the content and learned to apply the course concepts to solve problems (Carver et al, 2013).…”

Correlation between Grades Earned and Time in Online Courses

“…Schroeder, Baker, Terras, Mahar, and Chiasson (2016) noted that graduate students desired connectivity with their instructors but connectivity with other students was not viewed as important, while undergrad students viewed both as important. Carver et al (2013) noted that the most important factor in using synchronous sessions for graduate students was not simply adding the sessions to the course, but to specifically use the sessions to support and expand course content. The difference in perspective between graduate and undergraduate students might be a significant contributing factor affecting voluntary attendance at synchronous sessions within this study.…”