An Intervention to Support Deeper Student

Learning and Engagement:

An Example of the Flipped Classroom Model in a General

Physics Classroom

Jordan Rhodes

Under the Supervision of Roger Breed, Ed.D.

Lincoln, Nebraska

May 2017
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Westside High School, Omaha, NE
Westside Community Schools
29% Free/Reduced
Total Enrollment at Westside High School Lunch
2500
11.78% in 2001
2000
78% White
1500 8% African-American
1000
Enrollment
93.5% graduation rate
500
Assessment scores
0
favorable to statewide
averages.
School Year 1:1 Technology
District-wide
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Modular Scheduling
Sample student schedule:
Chapter 1: Introduction
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Project Team
Jordan Rhodes
Judith Stucky
Kim Gradoville
Ben Powers

Initial Questions Based on strategic plan and District initiatives

How does our team support the current school improvement goal
integrating technology in a meaningful way?

How can technology be used to improve teaching strategies?

How can technology be used be facilitate increasingly timely feedback?

And how can technology be used to provide additional interventions in

meaningful way?
Chapter 2: Problem Analysis
Targeted Outcomes of Westside High School
Increase the percentage of students who are
college/career ready in all areas of the ACT.
Increase the mean score on the Gallup staff engagement survey item #4 In the last seven
days, I have received recognition or praise for doing good work by .2 (from 2.92 to 3.12).

Increase collaboration and engagement for staff and students.

Increase proficiency rate (C or higher) in all courses.

Chapter 2: Problem Analysis
School Improvement Project Focus
General Physics growing concern for increasing number of
students limited success on accountability measures and
college ready standards in the area of physical science and
physics.
SIP targets instructional techniques that addresses the
outcome of increasing the number of students who are college-
ready and proficient in the course (grade of C or better)
Chapter 2: Problem Analysis
Statement of the Problem
Students in the General Physics course are demonstrating less
than desired levels of proficiency and engagement based on a
variety of classroom measures.
Only 46% of students who took the ACT considered college-ready in
scientific reasoning.
Spring 2016: 12% of students earned a D or lower in General Physics.
Room for improvement based on NeSA science score (83% proficient).
Homework engagement decreasing (anecdotal and success rate).

Developing instructional methods that support deeper student

learning in physics will support the school targets of increasing
the percentage of students who are meeting college-ready
standards on the ACT and increasing the proficiency rate in all
courses.
Chapter 2: Problem Analysis
Current Reality
Despite availability of teachers to students during day and current
techniques, students are still struggling in the course.

Best Practice Focus Questions

What is the best method that supports students in learning new
physics concepts?
What is the best method to reinforce physics concepts?

What strategies can be used to increase student achievement in

Physics?
What specific teaching methods correlate with the greatest increase
in student achievement in Physics?
What is the best use of student time in class for maximum student
learning?
Chapter 2: Problem Analysis
Project Questions

To address the problem of limited student engagement in coursework and

achievement in Physics, the project team developed the following
questions to guide initial research.
Will incorporating technology correlate with an increase achievement?

Did the intended changes increase student achievement?

What will be done if students do not show a positive response?

How will progress be monitored?

What will be the impact on students as a result of the changes in

teaching methodology?
Which strategies fit best in the Physics curriculum?

How will students with limited technology access respond to teaching

practices utilizing technology
 Chapter 3: Review of Best
Practice
A Flipped Classroom
Tomory, A., & Watson, S. (2015). Flipped Classrooms for Advanced Science Courses. Journal of Science
Education & Technology, 24(6), 875-887. doi:10.1007/s10956-015-957-B

Explicit Vocabulary Instruction

Young, E (2005). THE LANGUAGE OF SCIENCE, THE LANGUAGE OF STUDENTS: Bridging the Gap with Engaged
Learning Vocabulary Strategies, Science Activities, 42(2), 12-17

Project-Based Learning
Kanter, D. E., & Schreck, M. (2006). Learning content using complex data in project-based science: An
example from high school biology in urban classrooms. New Directions for Teaching & Learning,
2006(108), 77-91. doi:10.1002/tl.257
 Chapter 4: Plan of Action

Creating and Implementing the Intervention

Making videos
Assigning Videos
Monitoring implementation using EdPuzzle
Assessments compared to previous year
End of semester perceptual surveys of team and
students
Chapter 4: Plan of Action
 Chapter 5: Results
Assessment 2015 2016 Any other notes
2015 mode: 16
Unit 1 Assessment 1 88.1% 90.6% 2016 mode: 19
Unit 2 Assessment 1 87.6% 90%
Unit 2 Assessment 2 84.6% 88.9%
Unit 3 Assessment 1 81% 82%
Changed to multiple choice,
asking questions more similar
to what was asked during
Midterm Assessment 69.3% 84% course
2015 mode: 7
Lab Summary 1 73% 73% 2016 mode:8
Homework Category Rhodes improved from 66.9 to
Grade 66.90% 74.92% 74.92%
Cumulative Grade
(% of students below Rhodes was at 21% last year,
C) 12% overall 10% overall 12% this year
 Chapter 5: Results
Student Survey Responses
66% agreed or strongly agreed that videos made class easier.

70% agreed or strongly agreed that videos helped them understand

content better.

70% agreed or strongly agreed that videos supported them in

completing their homework successfully.

81% of students said they would prefer video instruction as homework

and complete practice work in class.

89% of students said they are more likely to watch videos if they count
for a grade.
 Chapter 5: Results
SIP Team Responses
All members felt that videos were beneficial to student understanding.

Videos allowed more individualized instruction outside of class.

Supported remediation of content.

Challenge of time commitment to making videos and using them to

assess student understanding.

Students would come to class with deeper or new questions that have
not been addressed in previous years.
 Chapter 6: Conclusion
A Worthwhile Investment of Time
Not as much improvement as hoped, but
Some marginal improvement on most measures when
comparing the 2016 cohort to the 2015 cohort.

Students in 2016 outscored (on average) the 2015 cohort on

each summative assessment.

Interesting Theme: Student motivation tied to grade what,

then is the purpose and meaning of grades?

Was improvement due to professional improvement of team

members or natural variation from one year to next?

Increased use of class time on more complex tasks and

assignments

Teachers could meet students where they are.

 Chapter 6: Conclusion
Recommendations
Continue to implement intervention/strategy and modify with
teacher and student feedback

Share learning with other courses and teachers in other subject

areas.

New questions as a result of SIP

Why did the intervention not yield significant gains in
achievement?

If the increased focus on standards and the use of PLC time

over the last decade has led to such a finely chiseled course,
are instructors at a point where only something truly
revolutionary will increase achievement?

Has the focused effort of the team to study their own

pedagogical beliefs and application gotten them to a point
where great gains may be difficult to find without radical
Thank you
Questions