| Literature DB >> 31366351 |
Yngve Røe1, Michael Rowe2, Nina B Ødegaard3, Hilde Sylliaas3, Tone Dahl-Michelsen3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to describe the design, implementation and evaluation of a flipped classroom teaching approach in physiotherapy education. The flipped classroom is a blended learning approach in which students receive digital lectures as homework, while active learning activities are used in the classroom. Flipped classroom teaching enables a learning environment that aims to develop higher-order cognitive skills.Entities:
Keywords: Flipped classroom; Physiotherapy education; Teaching with technology
Year: 2019 PMID: 31366351 PMCID: PMC6670169 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-019-1728-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Overview of the in-class learning activities of the 8 weeks flipped classroom approach
| Name of seminar and central themes | Learning resources |
|---|---|
Standardized measures for musculoskeletal disorders: ✓ Different types of measures ✓ Quality criteria ✓ The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) | • 95 min pre-recorded video lectures • Webpages and blogposts • YouTube videos • Book chapters and three scientific papers |
Evidence-based practice (I and II) ✓ Model for evidence based practice ✓ The hierarchy of evidence ✓ Planning of treatment ✓ How to structure the patient journal ✓ | • 75 min pre-recorded video lectures • An online course • YouTube videos • Webpages • Podcast episodes • Three scientific papers |
Pain as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience ✓ Nociception and pain processing ✓ Hypersensitivity ✓ Patient experiences with persistent pain ✓ Pain monitoring models ✓ Pharmacology and pain | • 174 min pre-recorded video lectures • An online course in patient education • YouTube videos • Webpages • Podcast episode • Seven scientific papers |
Physiotherapy for upper-extremity disorders ✓ Epidemiology ✓ Diagnostic classification ✓ Prognostic factors ✓ Treatment | • 167 min pre-recorded video lectures • YouTube videos • Webpages and blogposts • Book chapters and one scientific paper |
Physiotherapy for lower-extremity disorders ✓ Epidemiology ✓ Diagnostic classification ✓ Prognostic factors ✓ Treatment | • 83 min pre-recorded video lectures • YouTube videos • Book chapters and one scientific paper |
Physiotherapy for low back pain ✓ Epidemiology ✓ Diagnostic classification ✓ Prognostic factors ✓ Treatment | • 128 min of pre-recorded video lectures • YouTube videos • Podcast episodes • Book chapters and four scientific papers |
| Generic learning resources | • Book chapters and five web-pages |
General qualitative descriptions of grades in Norwegian higher education
| Letter grades | Criteria used in the assessment of examinations. |
|---|---|
| A – Excellent | An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgement and a high degree of independent thinking |
| B – Very good | A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a very good degree of independent thinking. |
| C – Good | A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas. |
| D – Satisfactory | A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking. |
| E – Sufficient | A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking. |
| F – Fail | A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking. |
Fig. 1Relative distribution (%) of Excellent, Very good and Good (A, B and C), Satisfactory and Sufficient (D and E), and Fail (F) performances in the course exam of the years 2013–2017
Analytic categories representing students’ perceptions of the factors that influenced their learning at the seminars
| Examples from survey responses | |
|---|---|
| Positive factors | |
| Interaction with peers and educators |
|
| Flexibility associated with digital learning resources |
|
| Didactical aspects, such as course coherence, relevant assignments |
|
| Negative factors | |
| Long and exhausting seminars |
|
| Little time for preparation or other reasons for not making preparations |
|
| Sub-optimal group dynamics or variation in ambitions among group members |
|
| Length of video lectures |
|
| Lack of available educators during group work |
|