FLIPPED CLASSROOM AND ITS IMPACT ON LEARNER ACHIEVEMENT AND LEARNER SATISFACTION IN AN UNDERGRADUATE TECHNOLOGY LITERACY COURSE By MAX SOMMER A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2017
2017 Max Sommer
To my family
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my advisor and my committee member for their guidance, support, patience, and overall time and energy they spent to help me accomplish my goals. I thank my colleagues, the instructors who allowed me to take over a few weeks of their course, who went above and beyond to accommodate the needs of my study. Finally, I thank my family, for the constant support and encouragement for me to further my education.
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 8 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 9 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 11 Context ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 12 Problem ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 15 Problem Statement ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 17 Purpose ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 17 Significance ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 17 Research Question ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 18 Literature Review ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 18 Blended Learning ................................ ................................ ................................ 18 Flipped Classroom ................................ ................................ ............................... 20 Technology Literacy ................................ ................................ ............................. 23 Learner Achievement ................................ ................................ ........................... 25 Learner Satisfaction ................................ ................................ ............................. 28 Conceptual Framework ................................ ................................ ........................ 28 Blended learning ................................ ................................ ............................ 28 Flipped classroom ................................ ................................ .......................... 29 Learner achievement and learner satisfaction ................................ .............. 30 Chapter 1 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 30 2 METHODS ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 32 Research Design ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 32 Participants ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 33 Instruments ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 36 Demographic/Academic Survey ................................ ................................ .......... 37 Photoshop Pre test ................................ ................................ .............................. 38 Practice Assignment ................................ ................................ ............................ 39 Transfer Assignment ................................ ................................ ............................ 40 Photoshop Post test ................................ ................................ ............................. 42 Learner Satisfaction Survey ................................ ................................ ................. 43 Procedure ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 44 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 56 Validity and Reliability ................................ ................................ ................................ 57 Chapter 2 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 57
6 3 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 59 Learner Achievemen t ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 59 Photoshop Pre test/Photoshop Post test ................................ ............................ 59 Practice Assignment ................................ ................................ ............................ 60 Transfer Assignment ................................ ................................ ............................ 61 Learner Satisfaction ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 62 Chapter 3 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 63 4 DISCUSSI ON ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 64 Learner Achievement ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 64 Learner Satisfaction ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 68 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 71 Implications and Recommendations for Practice ................................ ....................... 74 Recommendati ons for Future Research ................................ ................................ .... 75 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 76 APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC/ACADEMIC SURVEY ................................ ................................ .... 77 B PHOTOSHOP PRE TEST ................................ ................................ .......................... 78 C PRACTI CE ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS ................................ ................................ 80 D PRACTICE ASSIGNMENT RUBRIC ................................ ................................ ......... 99 E TRANSFER ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS ................................ .............................. 100 F TRANSFER ASSIGNMENT RUBRIC ................................ ................................ ...... 101 G PHOTOSHOP POST TEST ................................ ................................ ..................... 102 H LEARNER SATISFACTION SURVEY ................................ ................................ ..... 104 I PHOTOSHOP TOOLS HANDOUT ................................ ................................ .......... 105 J INSTRUCTOR LECTURE SCRIPT ................................ ................................ .......... 109 K INSTRUCTOR DISCUSSION TOPICS PROMPT ................................ ................... 112 L INFORMED CONSENT FORM ................................ ................................ ................ 113 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ 115 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .............................. 120
7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2 1 Data collection instruments and rationale related to the research question ........ 36 2 2 Weeks 4 7 Instructional Events ................................ ................................ ............ 45 2 3 Module 5 Treatment and Control Condition Instructional Events ........................ 51 3 1 Photoshop Pre test/Post test Descriptive Statis tics ................................ ............. 60 3 2 Practice Assignment Descriptive Statistics ................................ ........................... 61 3 3 Transfer Assignment Descriptive Statistics ................................ .......................... 62 3 4 Learner Satisfaction Survey Descriptive Statistics ................................ ............... 62
8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 1 Typical EME2040 Instruction ................................ ................................ ................ 14 1 2 Traditional instruction versus flipped classroom (University of Washington, 2017) ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 21 1 3 Generic Rubric for Procedural Standards (Harlen, p. 66) ................................ .... 27 2 1 Mod ule 5 treatment condition and control condition lesson plan synopsis ......... 33
9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Education FLIPPED CLASSROOM AND ITS IMPACT ON LEARNER ACHIEVEMENT AND LEARNER SATISFACTION IN AN UNDERGRADUATE TECHNOLOGY LITERACY COURSE By Max Sommer December 2017 Chair: Albert Ritzhaupt Major: Curriculum and Instruction The blended learning environment, which combines the strengths of the online learning environment and the face to face learning environment, is becoming more prominent than ever in higher edu cation. With the many affordances of improved technology and the countless pedagogical options that blended learning offers, it is imperative to examine blended learning practices to try and find the optimal set of circumstances that allow higher education learners to succeed in different contexts. This study examined the impact of one specific form of blended learning, the flipped classroom model, on learner achievement and satisfaction for undergraduate learners in a technology literacy course at a major university. The flipped classroom model has learners view course content and web lectures prior to a face to face meeting in the online environment, then the learners arrive at the face to face meeting prepared for instructor supported practice, collaborat ive learning activities, and more in depth use of classroom time. This study employed a quasi experimental pre test/post test design consisting of two groups: the treatment condition (sections in which instructors implemented the flipped classroom model fo r the module that was the focus of the study) and control condition (sections in which instructors lectured in the face to face
10 meeting, then learners completed the practice online as homework). Learners in each group received their form of instruction the n completed the same instructional activities and surveys, then these activities and surveys were collected as data and analyzed. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of learner achievement. In terms of learner satisfaction, however, there was a significant difference in which participants favored the control condition. This suggests that the treatment group had a more difficult time receiving instruction through the online lecture, possibly due to learn ers being preconfigured to prefer instructional methods they are accustomed to or deficiencies in the design of the lecture video.
11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION As technological advancements continue to occur, learning environments in higher education are evolv ing. With the affordances that these innovations offer, to face instruction (Bonk & Graham, 2006, p. 6). As this shift is occurring, it is vital to study the best practices and the latest opportunities offered by the learning environments that are becoming more prominent. Blended learning (BL), also called hybrid learning, combines the online learning env ironment and the traditional, face to face learning environment (Bonk & Graham, p. 5). BL has become one of the most popular trends in higher education. Norberg, delivery me thod of higher education courses (p. 4). According to the NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition, BL designs in courses and programs is (Adams Becker, Cummins, Davis, Freeman, Hall Giesinger, & Ananthanarayanan, 2017, p. 18). While the basic concept of BL is the combination of face to face and online learning, many focus on the opportunity for improved learning rather than just differentiated teaching methods. Sloman (2007) sta Sloman goes on to discuss how BL practices can be strategically designed to foster to and how these supportive
12 to explore different techniques to improve learning. One specific BL technique that is examined in this study is the flipped classroom (FC) m based lectures that are studied prior to face to learners to enter class meetings more prepared, and these face to face class meetings to b feedback and support (Thai et al., p. 3). This is significantly different from what face to face meetings are frequently used for in higher education, which is often deliv ery of content in the form of a lecture. Context EME2040: Introduction to Educational Technology (will be referred to as technology literacy ( often referred to as computer literacy ) course with educational and professional applications. It is offered at the University of Florida (UF) by the College of Education (CoE). On the Course Descriptions page of the Educational Technology portion of the UF CoE website, it states that EME2040 hape your perspectives and views of technology as they relate to your future career, society, teaching, learning, Module 1: Introduction Module 2: All About Computers and the Digital Divide M odule 3: Media Literacy, Copyright, and Plagiarism Module 4: Presentation Skills Module 5: All About Images (Part 1) Module 6: All About Images (Part 2) Module 7: Digital Identity Module 8: Digital Storytelling (Part 1)
13 Module 9: Digital Storytelling (Part 2) Module 10: Online Education and Jobs in the 21 st Century Module 11: Mobile Apps Module 12: Google Tools Module 13: Web 2.0 Tools Module 14: Websites and Blogs (Part 1) Module 15: Websites and Blogs (Part 2) This course employs a BL format. For ea ch module, there is a face to face by a discussion or an activity regarding the topic. The BL format of the EME2040 allows p. 9), meaning the amount of time spent by instructors and learners in the face to face classroom is reduced. While this is a three credit hour course, learners and instructors only meet for one hour per week. The rest of the module (the other two credit h ours earned each week by learners) is completed by the learners asynchronously in the online environment, which can include more activities, discussions, and projects. Once the next face to face meeting occurs, the next module begins. In this study, this m ethod of instruction in which the face to 1 below displays this instruction. Each module lasts one week, ma king this a 15 week course.
14 Figure 1 1. Typical EME2040 Instruction Enrollment for EME2040 is open to all undergraduate learners at UF, regardless of their age, their major, or how close they are to graduation. This allows the population of learners tha t take EME2040 to include a wide range of academic and cultural backgrounds. Because EME2040 is a critical trackin g course for students studying e ducation at UF, the course roster is often made up of a majority of e ducation students ; h owever, many learners pursing other assorted majors and minors sign up for this course as well. This is because the course fulfills a General Education requirement at UF, making it a useful course for learners of all academic backgrounds. As for cultural backgrounds of learner s, the EME2040 course rosters typically reflect the diverse cultural backgrounds that make up the undergraduate population of UF. Our study took place from Module 4 to Module 7, but it focused specifically on module, learners experienced the Face to face meeting: Marks the beginning of the module. Lecture about module topic followed by a discussion or activity. Online: Learners complete homework, which can include activities, discussions, and projects. When complete, module ends.
15 Photoshop application, learning skills and concepts necessary to using it effectively, then practicing these skills by following step by step instructions to manipulate graphics and use tools to generate a specific image The goal of the module was for learners to develop skills using Photoshop so they can apply these skills to edit and create original images in future course modules and, ultimately, their professional careers. The typical EME2040 instruction described earl ier included the instructor lecturing to introduce Photoshop and its tools, then the learners engaged in a practice assignment on their own as homework, following the face to face meeting. For this study, however, a revised condition was introduced in whic h the FC model was implemented. For this FC model, the learners watched a recorded lecture online asynchronously prior to Module 5 the face to face meeting. The learners then engaged in the practice assignment during the face to face meeting, with the inst ructor encouraging collaboration and present to answer questions and offer support as needed. Problem With BL possibly becoming the norm in higher education, it is imperative to study the most effective strategies and instructional design methods of this t eaching format. The nature of the problem that this study addresses derives from an instructional design approach. Peterson (2003) states that the first step in the instructional design process is ase of this study, the audience is current and future technology literacy course learners and the need is to find the optimal set of instructional circumstances for those learners. While the current instructional circumstances may be considered sufficient, instructional designers and
16 regarding BL environments. This is because of the countless options and multimedia tools available to instructors using this type of format, and the endless possibilities of combinations of instructional activities and strategies that can shape a BL lesson plan. ment and learner satisfaction in comparison to the typical EME2040 instruction can put us one step in the right direction towards finding the best practices in the BL environment for this particular context. In this situation, the context at hand is an un dergraduate introductory level technology literacy course. In the 21 st century, this type of course is a common literacy has become increasingly critical to success in any educational discipline or emphasis on hiring employees who contain technology skills and technology literacy, courses like EME2040 are offered more than ever before. Within the last thirty years, Rodriguez, & Fanguy, 2011, p. 162). While these courses may have been required for three decades, the technological advancements of recent years provide affordances that were not available years ago. This presents us with a new need, and with this need a new opportunity, to explore more pedagogical options to achieve the most effective instructional design and course strategies for the context at hand.
17 Problem Statement Due to the rapid increase in technological advancements that have contributed to the many options and possibilities in the BL environment, investigation into optimal circumstances and instructional design in the undergraduate technology literacy context is necessary and needed. Examining the impact of the FC model is imperative because it will put us one more step in the right direction towards discovering the best practices in the BL environment for the context of this study. Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine what impact a specific form of BL, the FC model, can have on lear ner achievement and learner satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course. Significance satisfaction, compared to the typical EME2040 instruction, can shed light on preferences and effectiveness of instruction for learners in the undergraduate technology literacy course context. Gaining insight on this information can take us one step closer to the optimal circumstances for these types of learners in this type of cou rse. The findings from this study can then be applied to comparable situations across the country or the world, in which similar types of learners are taking similar types of courses. This is a great opportunity because of the large population of diverse u ndergraduate learners worldwide along with the abundance of technology literacy discipline courses offered worldwide, making the work of this study relevant and significant.
18 Research Question This study seeks to find the answer to the following question: w hat impact does implementing a FC model have on learner achievement and learner satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course? Literature Review Blended Learning This study examined the BL environment; EME2040 is a course taught using a BL f ormat. As stated earlier, BL is gaining popularity in higher education. In the most recent NMC Horizon Report: Higher Education Edition BL is regarded as one of the tw Becker, Cummins, Davis, Freeman, Hall Giesinger, & Ananthanarayanan, 2017, p. 9). There are various definitions of BL that share a similar theme. In The Handbook of Blended Learning, Bonk and Graham (2006) simply define BL systems as those that to face instruction with computer classify BL by setting parameters for the amount or ratio of instruction that takes place online versus face to face. Allen, Seaman, and Garrett (2007), for example, de fine BL Some believe BL should not just be defined as a simple combination or a ratio of 5). 231). This is supported by Garrison and Vaughan (2008), who explain that BL occurs to face oral communication and online written communication are optimally
19 integrated such that the strengths of each are blended into a unique learning experience ions all apply to the BL instruction that is being explored in this study, as it combines online instruction with face to face instruction, includes a ratio of 30 to 79 percent online, and aims to combine the strengths of the face to face environment with the strengths of the simple yet effective definition from Blended Learning in Higher Education that is a concise combination of these previous definitions : ughtful fusion of face to There are multiple reasons why institutions implement BL courses and programs. The main reasons BL is implemented is to improve pedagogy, to increase access and flexibility, and increase cost effectiveness (Bonk & Graham, p. 8). Examples of frameworks that use BL to attempt to improve pedagogy include the Community of Inquiry (CoI), the Multimodal Model, and the FC model BL that follows the CoI framework uses the affordances of the online lear ning environment and the face to face learning environment to establish a social presence, a cognitive presence, and a teaching presence (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007, p. 159). The Multimodal Model uses The FC model will be described in detail in the next section. These are just three examples; there are countless approaches that use BL to attempt to improve pedagogy. Garrison and Vaughan describe the reason for having a framework guide the practic e of BL,
20 he openness of BL redesigns, in terms of the range of possibilities, The flexibility and the increased access to learning and information has also contributed to the increased adoption of BL practices. Bonk and Graham (2006) reference many programs in The Handbook of Blended Learning possible if students were not able to have a majority of their learning experiences at a outside commi increase access to learning and learner flexibility without surrendering face to face social interaction makes it an attractive choice for many courses and programs. As access to learni ng increases with BL practices, cost effectiveness does as well. BL period of time with consistent, semi According to G arrison and Kanuka (2004), providing interactive learning experiences to (p. 100). Flipped Classroom The FC d in literature since 2000 (Lage and Platt, 2000, p. 11). The FC gained popularity in education ever since 2007, when two chemistry teachers in Colorado implemented the FC model in their high school classrooms (Tucker, 2012, p. 82). The basic concept of th e FC model is that learners view web based lectures prior to their face to face meeting s and then, when the meeting occurs, they can engage in
21 2017, p. 1). A graphic to describe the FC model and how it differs from traditional instruction can be seen in Figure 1 2. Some simply define FC as a revers al of roles of locations: typical face to face components of instruction (lecture or direct instruction) being completed outside of class, and typical out of class components of instruction (practice) being completed within the classroom (Bishop & Verleger 2013, p. 5). While ordering of classroom and at home (Bishop & Verleger, p. 5). Figure 1 2. Traditional instruction vers us flipped classroom (University of Washington, 2017) different aspects of instruction that the FC can enhance. The initial improvement occurs outside of the classroom in the on resources provided, along with other materials, to learn concepts and complete tasks on their own at their own pace 2013, p. 3). This provi efforts on their individual learning needs so they are not left behind by class discussions that go too fast or become bored by class time that is spent covering content they Davies et al. p. 3).
22 The other component of instruction that is enhanced with FC is what occurs inside of the classroom. Because the direct instruction (lecture in most traditional subjects) is completed asynchronously outside of the classroom, the face to face (Davies et al. p. 3). These in rmation transmission such as lecturing but, instead, become opportunities to diagnose student Vaughan, 2008, p. 117). This further provides individual instruction to learne rs, as they can ask specific questions from the online material, engage in collaborative activities, possible (Asef Vaziri, 2015, p. 72). In this study, we will refer to FC as t he strategic blend of web based, asynchronous direct instruction outside of the classroom and collaborative, deeper level learning activities in the classroom. These benefits of the FC affect both learners and instructors. Learners benefit from the increas ed choice in their individualized instruction of the web based portion of the instruction through increased freedom to complete the work when convenient, options as to where to complete the work, and personal selection of how thoroughly to study instructio nal materials. Herrei d and Schiller (2013) stated that using the FC model also benefitted instructors through finding more time for in depth learning act ivities due to the learners coming into class with content knowledge (p. 62) Fulton (2012) states that instructors can require learners to complete pre assignments about the content to help instructors adjust their lessons to fit the needs of the learners (p. 20) The FC model
23 also allows instructors to easily see learning preferences of the class and modif y lessons accordingly, provide an effective solution for absences (learners can still view and complete the web based component of the class), and make it easier to create an (Herr eid & Schiller p. 62). Along with these benefits, there are some aspects of the FC model that instructors may view as negative. According to Sahin, Cavazoglu, and Zeytuncu (2015), some learners initially have trouble or are resistant because they a re accustomed to traditional approaches (p. 144) can be very time consuming for teachers and some teachers can be resistant because Sahin et al., p. 144). Finally, Sahin et al. warn that if materials are not of high quality or do not match with the extra work on the front end of creating lesson plans for c ourses. Technology Literacy While EME2040: Introduction to Educational Technology is required for education majors at UF and includes an emphasis on education, the overarching focus important to understand what technology literacy is and why it is significant in the domain of higher education. Technology literacy is sometimes used synonymously with computer literacy and digital literacy (Davies, 2011, p. 46). In this study, however, technology literacy is considered to encompass computer literacy; this is because
24 Burkhardt, Monsour, Valdez, Gunn, Dawson, Lemke, Coughlin, Thadani, and works, what purposes it can serve, and how it can be used efficiently and effectively to achieve specific the technology is capable of, they are able to use the technology proficiently, and they Ezzaine (2007) describes computer literacy, which is a component of technology well as the ability to implement this knowledge in the skillful, productive use of computer appli descriptions are indicative of the discipline of the course in this study. In this study, we will refer to technology literacy as awareness and knowledge of technological tools and purposes paired with practical, professional application skills. We consider the course in which this study took place, EME2040: Introduction to Educational Technology, to be a technology literacy course that covers computer literacy. This type of cour se is an important component of education. Ezzaine states st century now requests l earners to be able to achieve quick processing, critical thinking, and creative productivity through the affordances that technology offers (p. 34). While some believe that learners today are more technologically literate than generations in the past, Davi technology does not make someone a technology expert any more than living in a
25 course is necessary While the objectives of instruction in technology literacy courses may vary depending on the program or institution, there are a few themes that surface from multiple sources. These include instilling learners with an awarene ss of the availability and basic purpose of technology, an understanding of the ethics of personal and social technology use, and the skills to implement and practice using technology to complete various tasks, such as solving problems, creating projects, and communicating with others (Davies, p. 47; Siegle, p. 33). The module that is the focus of this study (Module 5: All About Images [Part 1]) aims to achieve these objectives through instruction and practice using the Photoshop application. One objective of this module is to have learners become more visually introduction webpage on th profession, visual media surrounds you and it is in your best interest to better experience with and learning the b asic purposes of a popular image editing software using this software, and developing skills in the implementation and practice of using Photoshop to complete tasks and create projects (from the EME2040 course website). Learner Achievement This study measured learner achievement, also referred to as learner performance, as a factor to determine the impact of the FC model on EME2040:
26 Introduction to Educational Technology. In t his study, learner achievement refers to what the learner is able to achieve on a specific performance task after participating in the instruction. The way we measured learner achievement is by looking at performance on pre and post assessments, a practic e assignment, and a transfer or application assignment. We assessed learner achievement to compare the effectiveness of the different pedagogical approaches ( FC model versus traditional EME2040 instruction). assessment showed measuring Learner achievement can be measured in a number of ways, as it depends on what the instructor believes is 207) and the learning objectives for the module or lesson. While there are many options when it comes to assessing learner achievement, there are some guidelines that can support a strong, dependable assessment. Fry, Ketteridge, and Marshall (2008) state world skills active construction of creati ve responses, and the integration of a variety of skills into a holistic the criteria used in judging them, are specified are key variables affecting dependability. Where neither tasks nor criteria are well specified, dependability is low. Detailed criteria, descr ibing progressive levels of competency, have been shown to be capable of express detailed criteria in progressive levels of competency is a scoring rubric. A scoring r
27 clear performance targets to students for agreed but generic, criteria that allow evidence to be gathered from the full range of classroom p. 213). Marzano et al. created a generic rubric for assessing procedural standards, which can be seen below in Figure 1 3. Because this study measures learner achievement of a Photoshop module in which learners follow a procedure presented to them by de tailed instructions and use their skills to perform the task at hand, this generic rubric is similar to the scoring rubric used in the study. Figure 1 3. Generic Rubric for Procedural Standards (Harlen, p. 66) Finally, something that should be considered when assessing learner achievement is bias. Instructors must be careful not to insert any bias into their non ently influenced by gender,
28 Learner Satisfaction The other factors examined to determine the impact of the FC model on a technology literacy course are learner sat isfaction. This study specifically investigates learner satisfaction of the instructor, along with aspects of the course materials. Merriam Webster simply defines satis faction enjoyment of the learners that come as a result. widely used strategy based on the premise Benson, and Savery, 2004, p. 1). Because the learners are providing their own input o n their satisfaction is critical (Chen & Hoshower, 2003, p. 72). Surveys, traditional course evaluations, and questionnaires are among tools that educators can use to col lect learner satisfaction (Jurczyk et al., p. 1). Conceptual Framework framework. The conceptual framework displays how key concepts and theories relate to BL the FC model, learner achievement, and learner satisfaction in a technology literacy discipline for undergraduate learners (Figure 1 4 ). Blended l earning This study took place in the BL environment. BL is the deliberate mixture of face to face and online instructional strate gies, attempting to use the strengths of each
29 educational environment to improve learning (Garrison and Vaughan, p. 5). With BL growing in popularity in higher education (Norberg et al., p. 4), the need to study its pedagogical methods and instructional d esign continue to grow. The unlimited combinations of strategies and the countless design possibilities makes BL an especially important topic to study. BL most imperative characteri stics of learning that led to the development of BL (p. 23). organization an d methodology. The theoretical background for social learning, which and social interactions, helps to explain the expected relationships between the variables in this s tudy and the impact that FC model may have. Flipped c lassroom The FC model has learners view web based content prior to meeting for class. This allows the face to based interactive learning (Thai, De Wever, & Valcke, 2017, p. 1), rather than just information being presented from the instructor to passive learners. BL earning is a social process. This focus on social interaction and learning using the FC model reflects ideas presented by Piaget and Vygotsky. Their theories of social learning and constructivism help explain the facilitation of content and material in the FC model that takes place in
30 this study, and the methodology for exploring the depending variables that could be impacted by the FC model. Learner achievement and learner s atisfaction This study was informed by guidelines and approaches of other studies that employed a comparison of different instructional methods and designs. It also used assessment strategies and survey techniques that have been used in studies that explore learner achievement and learner satisfaction variables. Finally, instructional d the organization of content within this study. Figure 1 4. Conceptual Framework Chapter 1 Summary The purpose of this study was to examine the impact the FC model (web based lectures viewed prior to class meeting, collaborative practice with instructor support during class meetings) had on learner achievement and learner satisfaction in an
31 undergraduate technology literacy course. Participants enrolled in the BL course EME2040: Introduction to Educational Technology, offered by the College of Education at UF, where one module implemented a FC model in the BL environment. With all of the technological adv ancements of the past few years, the need to explore instructional design options that aim to achieve the optimal circumstances for learners in different contexts continuously surfaces. This study looks to see if the FC model is a more optimal method of in struction for undergraduate learners in a technology literacy course than the typical EME2040 BL instruction (live lecture during class meetings, practice occurring asynchronously as homework). Examining the learner achievement and learner satisfaction of the FC model compared to the typical EME2040 instruction can shed light on preferences and effectiveness of instruction for learners in this context, taking us one step closer to the optimal circumstances for these types of learners in this type of course. This information can then be applied to situations across the country or the world in which similar types of learners are taking similar types of courses. This study explored how the variables learner achievement and learner satisfaction can be measured a n analyzed in the BL environment, using the FC model, and within the technology literacy discipline.
32 CHAPTER 2 METHODS Research Design The researcher drew data from one blended learning (BL) undergraduate course at a major public university in the southeast United States during the Fall 2017 semester. The study was designed to examine what impact the flipped classroom (FC) model had on learner achievement and learner satisfaction. This study employed a quasi experimental pre test/post test design co nsisting of two groups: the treatment condition (sections in which instructors implemented the FC model for the module that was the focus of the study) and control condition (sections in which instructors taught the module using typical EME2040 instruction ). The implementation of the FC model was the independent variable in this study, while the dependent variables included learner achievement and learner satisfaction. Learner achievement dependent variable collection materials comprised of a pre test, a p ractice assignment, a transfer assignment, and a post test. Learner satisfaction dependent variable collection materials included a learner satisfaction survey. These r in this chapter. For the module that was the focus of this study (Module 5: All About Images [Part 1]), instructors used two different lesson plans for each of their sections: one lesson plan that implemented the FC model for the treatment condition grou p and one that employed the typical EME2040 instruction for the control condition group. Both lesson plans contained the same instructional events: a lecture on the content of the module, a minor activity to ensure the lecture was reviewed, a short discuss ion about the content
33 and the future assignments, and the practice assignment. However, the instructional events took place at different times and/or in different places (either synchronously during the face to face meeting or asynchronously before or afte r the face to face meeting) for the two groups. Other events that occurred in the study (demographic/academic survey, pre test, transfer assignment, post test, learner satisfaction survey) occurred either before or after this module and were held constant between the two groups. Figure 2 1 displays a synopsis of the lesson plans for the two groups for this module; this module, along with all events that made up the study, will be F igure 2 1. Module 5 treatment condition and control condition lesson plan synopsis Participants The participants in this study were the individuals enrolled in the course Introduction to Educational Technology (EME2040) at the University of Florida (UF) du ring the Fall 2017 semester. Enrollment for EME2040 is open to all undergraduate Treatment Condition (Flipped Classroom Model) Online: Lecture, short activity Face to Face Meeting: Short discussion, practice assignment Control Condition (Typical EME2040 Instruction) Face to Face Meeting: Lecture, short activity, short discussion Online: Practice assignment
34 learners at UF, regardless of their age, their major, or how close they are to graduation. This course consists of five sections (separate classes) and three instructors (two of the instructors teach two sections, one of the instructors teaches one section). Learners chose which section they are in through the UF course registration process without any knowledge of this study taking place. Three of the EME2040 sections were des ignated as the treatment condition, and two of the sections were designated as the control condition. In the fourth face to face class meeting of the semester (one week before Module 5: All About Images [Part 1]) for this BL course, a short survey was coll ected to gather demographic and academic information of the participants. The survey also asked learners to how they would describe their experience in using Photoshop, giving them four options: no experience, limited experience, moderate experience, and e xtensive experience. The updated Microsoft Excel spreadsheet after data collection was complete included 103 total participants. Data for fifteen participants was then deleted due to not completing Informed Consent Forms, th en another fifteen were deleted due to not completing the Demographic/Academic Survey. Finally, one test. This left the researcher with data for 72 participants ; 4 1 (56.9 %) in the treatment condition group and 31 (43.1%) in the control condition group Fifty seven (79.2%) of the participants identified as female, and 15 (20.8%) of the participants identified as male The mean age of the participants was 19.72 years old (SD = 1.50) with a
35 minimum of 18 years old and a maximum of 28 years old. Forty one ( 56.9 %) participants reported their ethnic background as White /Caucasian, followed by 18 (25 %) Asian/Pacific Islander, 6 (8.3%) Hispanic/Latino 5 ( 6.9%) Black/African American, 1 (1.4%) Native American, and 1 (1.4%) Other. As for the academic information collected by the survey, 29 ( 40.3% ) participants reported their major at UF as Elementary Education, followed by 12 (16.7%) Sports Management, 10 (1 3.9%) Telecommunications, 6 (8.3%) Public Relations, 5 (6.9%) Advertising, 3 (4.2%) Journalism, 3 (4.2%) Exploratory, and 1 (1.4%) of each of the following: Health Science, Pre School Education, Spanish, Art Education, History, Business, and Family, Youth, and Community Service (the count adds up to more than 72 because some participants have multiple majors) Fourteen (19.4%) participants reported that they have minors, with 5 (6.9%) Business minors and 1 (1.4%) participant each with the following minors: Spanish, Photography, Sociology, Mass Communications, Non Profit Organizational Leaders h ip, Education, Theatrical Performance, Communication Studies, and Disabilities. As for prior Photoshop experience, 29 (40.3%) participants reported they had no experien ce, 30 (41.7%) said they had limited experience, 13 (18.1%) said they had moderate experience, and no participants said they had extensive experience. Because EME2040 is an undergraduate course that consists of learners from a wide range of demographic and academic backgrounds, this sample is a strong representation for the target audience for this study. This mix of undergraduate learners with diverse backgrounds represents the same type of mix that make up the target
36 audience for this study and for genera l education technology literacy classes across the country. Instruments This study included various data collection instruments to attempt to answer the research question. These data collection instruments and their rationale related to the research questi on are summarized in Table 2 1: Table 2 1 Data collection instruments and rationale related to the research question Data Collection Instruments Rationale Demographic/Academic Survey This survey recognized whether the sample represents the target population. Photoshop Pre test This pre test gather ed baseline scores for the participants. This help ed det ermine the impact of the method of instruction on learner achievement. Practice Assignment This assessment examined how the participants perform ed on a practice instructional task to explore if there is a correlation between score and the method of instruction. Transfer Assignment This assessment further examined how the participants perform ed on a transfer instructional task to explore if there is a correlation between score and the method of instruction. Photoshop Post test This post test gather ed final scores that were compared to the baseline scores determined by the pre test. Comparing these two scores for participants will help det ermine the impact of the method of instruction on learner achievement. Learner Satisfaction Survey This survey gathered of the instructor and aspects of the module to observe if there is a correlation between learner satisfaction and the method of instruction.
37 Below, each data collection instrument is described in detail in terms of their co mponents, their purpose, and their source or design rationale: Demographic/Academic Survey The Demographic/Academic Survey was presented to participants before the study began and col lected online using Qualtrics. This survey is available in Appendix A. While the original plan was to collect this data on the computer lab computers in the researcher to send participants a link to the survey to be completed asynchronously on their personal laptops (aside from one section). More about this will be explained in the being used was representative of the target audience of the study (undergraduate lea rners of diverse ethnicities and various academic backgrounds), so appropriate items were presented. The first item presented on the survey was a unique identification (ID) code for each participant. This ID was used throughout the entire study; participa nts used their together, and so participants can remain anonymous to the researcher. Following the ID, this survey consisted of five items questioning the participants ab out demographic information (including age, gender, and ethnic background), academic information (what majors and minors participants are pursuing at UF), and information about their Photoshop experience. For the question pertaining to Photoshop experience it asked learners how they would describe their backgrounds in using Photoshop, giving them four options: no experience, limited experience, moderate experience, and extensive experience. This information was gathered for data analysis later in the study pertaining
38 to Photoshop experience playing a role in learner achievement on assessments and assignments during the study. Photoshop Pre test The Photoshop Pre test was completed by participants prior to the study beginning, also using Qualtrics. This pre test is available in Appendix B. Once again, the original plan was to collect data on the computer lab computers in the EME2040 classroom but instead, links to the survey were sent to participants (aside from one section). This pre test was designed and us ed in this study for two reasons; the first being to collect a baseline score from each participant. This would be helpful when considering learner achievement and comparing this baseline score to the score participants receive on their post test that was taken following the study. The other reason this pre (treatment condition and control condition) (Gribbons & Herman, 1997, p. 3). This is useful because if results on the learner achievement mea sures later in the study show The Photoshop Pre test was an eight item multiple choice assessment. It was designed by the researcher (who is an EME2040 instructor) based on the learning objectives for the Photoshop lesson delivered in the EME2040 Photoshop lecture and assignments that follow. It includes questions pertaining to underlying Photoshop concept s, starting a Photoshop project, Photoshop tools, and completing a Photoshop project. The KR 20 for th is pre test was measured as .53. This is a result of the assessment being designed by the researcher without having the time or resources for
39 field or pil ot testing prior to the launch of the study. The short number of assessment items could have also contributed to this score (Onquegbuzie & Daniel, 2002, p. 93). Practice Assignment e key assessment during Module 5: All About Images (Part 1). The directions for this assignment is available in Appendix C, and the rubric for this assignment is available in Appendix D. This assignment was taken from the EME2040 content, as it has been us ed for this Photoshop module in this course for several years. This instrument was used to gather scores to contribute to analyze learner achievement in the study and to y to practice the skills they learned from the lecture. For this assignment, detailed instructions and all of the materials needed were posted within the module on Canvas. Learners were to follow the directions exactly to create a specific image (four type s of shoes, with labels, and a specific background and title). The Practice Assignment had learners download four pictures of shoes and use these pictures along with assorted Photoshop tools to create several layers within Photoshop and manipulate their ne w image in various ways. Within Module 5 on the Canvas course website, learners could either view or download the Practice Assignment directions. Learners were to follow these directions precisely to create the correct final image and receive full credit. This assignment acted as a practice increase retention of skills learned (p. 2).
40 This is a strong assessment to measure learner achievement in terms of practicing new skills because of the specificity of the final product. This limited the possibility of subjectivity influencing scoring the learner achievement on the assessment. This r assessment tasks, and the criteria used in judging them, are specified are key variables The criteria used to assess the Practice Assignment was specified in a detailed useful for learners because they can check to make sure t hese components are involved, and is beneficial for instructors because it is a straightforward, non biased way to score the assignment. Transfer Assignment the key assessment i n Module 6: All About Images (Part 2). The directions for this assignment are available in Appendix E, and the rubric for this assignment is available in Appendix F. This assignment was taken from the EME2040 content, as it has been used for this Photoshop module in this course for several years. This instrument was used to gather scores to contribute to analyze learner achievement in the study and to examine what the impact of different instructional methods was on transferring skills to application. While the Practice Assignment was detailed in directions and protocol, the Transfer Assignment was open ended and did not give participants specified instructions about exactly what to do. Instead, the directions simply asked participants
41 at correlates to an aspect or theme related to your field of study course website). While the Practice Assignment assessed practicing the skills gained from viewing the Mo ability to transfer those skills to a creative application. Ford, Smith, Weissbein, Gully, knowledge, skills, 218). Events of Instruction includes improving retention and transferring knowledge, and further describes achievement in terms of participants retrieving knowledge from the previous module and applying the sk ills they learned to this new, creative project. The criteria used to assess the Transfer Assignment was specified in a detailed rubric, which was also posted in Module 6 on Canvas for participants to review prior to submitting their assignment. The rubric is consistent with the directions in that it is more open a high quality, professional looking image to assess the learners on their achievement (from the Visual Image Project rubric on the EME2040 Canvas course website). This is useful for learners because they can check to see the criteria in which they are being
42 assessed, and is beneficial for instructors because it is gives a direction and focus for scoring the assignment. Photoshop Post test The Photoshop Post test was completed by participants following the end of the study, using Qualtircs on the computer lab computers in the EME2040 classroom. This post test is available in Appendix G. This post test was designed to collect a final score for considering learner achievement by comparing it to the baseline score from the pre The Photoshop Post test was an eight item multiple choice a ssessment. The items were the same as the items on the pre test used before the study began, but the questions were presented in a different order than those on the Photoshop Pre test. Also, the multiple choice answer distractors for each question were pre sented in a different order on the post test. The same items were used on the post test as the pre test to ensure consistency between the two assessments. The researcher did not want differences in the assessments to impact the results of the study. Also, because the two assessments are taken by participants exactly three weeks apart from one another with multiple instructional events in between, the researcher believed participants would not be able to remember individual items from the pre test when they are completing the post test. Finally, participants never received feedback from their pre test, so they did not gain knowledge about those specific assessment items in terms of if they were correct or incorrect on the pre test. The KR 20 for this post tes t was measured as 24 This is a result of the assessment being designed by the researcher without having the time or resources for field or pilot testing prior to the launch of the study. The short
43 number of assessment items could have also contributed to this score, along with having basic, easy items that did not differentiate between participants (Onquegbuzie & Daniel p. 93). Learner Satisfaction Survey The Learner Satisfaction Survey was presented to participants following the end of the study and col lected using Qualtrics on the computer lab computers in the EME2040 classroom. This survey is available in Appendix H. The purpose of this survey was to collect information on the satisfaction of the learners in terms of the instructor and aspects of the m aterial in order to determine what impact the different instructional methods had on learner satisfaction. This survey was taken from a similar study that Lim, Morris, and Kupritz conducted in 2007. These researchers used their survey to compare the learne r satisfaction of participants in online learning instruction with the satisfaction of those taking part in BL instruction. While the study being described in this paper compares two forms of BL instead, the component of the survey that is being used still captured learner satisfaction and allowed the researcher to analyze the data to compare two methods of instruction. The Learner Satisfaction Survey is a 10 item Likert scale type of survey, wi th the participants choosing a response for each item on a five point scale. A Likert scale type used in the social sciences, both as research tools and in practical applic & Jacoby, 1971, p. 657). Each item brings attention to an aspect of the instructor or the module material, and the participants are to select their perception of that aspect of f responses (from 1 5,
44 willingness to listen to learners, use of examples, availabi lity of extra help, use of questioning, command of the subject matter, presentation of information, ability to summarize important points, and use of web technologies in instruction. Cronbach for this survey was measured as .93 Procedure Prior to the Fall 2017 semester beginning, the researcher (who is also one of the EME2040 instructors) met with the other two EME2040 instructors to discuss plans for the study in the upcoming semester. The purposes of this meeting were to inform the other instructors of the study that would be taking place in the upcoming semester and to designate which EME2040 sections would be part of the treatment condition (using the FC model for instruction) and which sections would be part of the control condition (using typical EME2040 instruction). To limit the likelihood that the time of the day may act as and extraneous variable in the study, it was attempted to assign as close to an equal amount of morning and afternoon classes to each type of instruction as possible. The re sult of this was having three treatment condition sections (one morning, one midday, and one afternoon) and two control condition sections (one morning and one afternoon). This step was taken because Johnson and Christenson (2008) state that an extraneous 42). The researcher and one instructor each taught one treatment condition section and one control condition section, and the third instructor taught only a treatment conditio n section (to make up five sections total).
45 As for informing the other two EME2040 instructors of the study that would be taking place in the following semester, the following table (Table 2 2) was presented by the researcher at this meeting and acts as a synopsis for the instructional events that took place from weeks 4 7 during the Fall 2017 semester, regarding the study. Module 4 and Module 7 topics are not included in this table because while events occurred for the purposes of the study, the topics of these modules were unrelated to the study. Module 5: All About Images (Part 1) is the module in which the different instructional methods will be implemented. Table 2 2. Weeks 4 7 Instructional Events Control Condition: Typical EME2040 Instruction Treatment Condition: Flipped Classroom Model MODULE 4: 1. Demographic/Academic Survey 2. Photoshop Pre test MODULE 5: All About Images (P. 1) In Class 1. Face to face Lecture 2. Photoshop Tools Handout 3. Short Discussion Online 4. Practice Assignment MODULE 6: All About Images (P. 2) 1. Transfer Assignment MODULE 7: 1. Photoshop Post test 2. Learner Satisfaction Survey MODULE 4: 1. Demographic/Academic Survey 2. Photoshop Pre test MODULE 5: All About Images (P. 1) Online 1. Web based Lecture 2. Photoshop Tools Handout In Class 3. Short Discussion 4. Practice Assignment MODULE 6: All About Images (P. 2) 1. Transfer Assignment MODULE 7: 1. Photoshop Post test 2. Learner Satisfaction Survey Following this EME2040 instructors meeting, the Fall 2017 semester began. The first event of the study did not take place until the fourth week of the semester, during the Module 4 face to face class meeting.
46 Before each EME2040 face to face class meeting throughout the study, the researcher met with the other two EME2040 instructors to discuss plans for the study and to train the instructors to ensure consistency between the instructors. For the Module 4 face to face meeting, the researcher informed the i nstructors prior to this class meeting that the only aspects of the study that had to be completed that week were the Demographic/Academic Survey and the Photoshop Pre test. The original plan was for participants to arrive at the fa ce to face meeting for M odule 4 and log onto the computer lab computers (there is one computer located at each seat) in the designated EME2040 classroom to complete the Demographic/Academic Survey and the Photoshop Pre test The type of computers in this computer lab classroom ar e 26 core Intel Core i5, 1TB HDD, 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 memory, 4 USB 3.0, 2 Thunderbolt, SDXC Card reader However, due to a hurricane resulting in UF cancelling classes for Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday of week 4 of the Fall 2017 seme ster, and then a pipe bursting in the same building as the EME2040 computer lab classroom resulting in the room being unusable for a period of time, adjustments had to be made. Four of the five EME2040 sections that took part in this study had their Modul e 4 face to face meeting cancelled; the section that was not cancelled was forced to switch locations due to the burst pipe. The new location was not a computer lab, so data er lab computers. For the sections that did not meet for Module 4, the Demographic/Academic Survey and the Photoshop Pre test were emailed to each participant, along with
47 detailed instructions on how to complete these surveys and that they were due prior t o the next face to face meeting (Module 5). The Demographic/Academic Survey was presented online using Qualtrics. Instructors provided each participant with a unique identification (ID) code; for the sections who did not meet for Module 4, these ID codes were sent to participants through emails. The instructors provided the participants with files that contained these ID codes to use as a reference, as this ID code will be used instead of participant names for all study events and materials. Instructors al so kept these files on hand in case participants needed them. ID codes were used in this study instead of names so the data from each participant can be linked throughout the study and the data analysis process, while ensuring anonymity for the participant s throughout the study. After completing this survey, the participants were asked to complete the Photoshop Pre test. For the sections that did not meet for Module 4, the instructions in the emails sent out told participants to complete this pre test foll owing the Demographic/Academic Survey. For the one section that did meet for Module 4, this pre test was also presented to participants online using Qualtrics. Participants inpu tted their ID codes in the designated area and then completed the eight item multiple choice pre test. When finished, Module 4 instruction began, unrelated to the study. Participants in sections in which class was cancelled for Module 4 simply completed th e online material associated with this module. The emailed instructions for those sections that did not have a Module 4 face to face meeting had to include different instructions based on whether participants were in
48 a treatment condition section or a cont rol condition section. For those in the treatment condition sections (using the FC model), instructors gave directions to the participants that their homework was to complete the Demographic/Academic Survey and the Photoshop Pre test prior to viewing th e w eb based lecture and completing the Photoshop Tools Handout. All of these instructional tasks were due online by 11:59pm on the day before the Module 5 face to face meeting the following week. This would ensure that these participants viewed and completed the proper materials so they would be prepared when arriving at the Module 5 face to face meeting. Control condition sections did not have any homework for Module 4 aside from completing the Demographic/Academic Survey and the Photoshop Pre test. The one section that had a Module 4 face to face meeting was a treatment condition section. At the end of the meeting, the instructor gave directions to the participants that their homework was to view the web based lecture and complete the Photoshop Tools Handout online by 11:59pm on the day before the Module 5 face to face meeting the following week. Following the conclusion of Module 4, the researcher created two new Microsoft Excel spreadsheets on his 13 inch MacBook Air laptop for data collection and storage. The researcher was the only person with access to this laptop and these spreadsheets. their corresponding ID codes. The purpose of this spreadsheet was so EME2040 course credit could be given to participants for completing course assignments following the completion of the study (because ID codes only, instead of participant names, were used for course assignments throughout the study). After this spreadsheet was created
49 a until the data analysis process was complete. Only after the data analysis process was complete did the researcher open this spreadsheet and link the ID codes back to the The second Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that was created by the researcher following the completion of Module 4 was the dat a collection spreadsheet. At the time of Demographic/Academic Survey data, and their correlating pre test scores. As each data collection instrument was used, the corresponding scores f rom those instruments were added to this spreadsheet throughout the study. This spreadsheet was also stored and The next instructional events that occurred during the study were th ose included in Module 5: All About Images (Part 1). For the treatment condition sections, homework was assigned to watch the web based lecture and complete the Photoshop Tools Handout prior to the Module 5 face to face meeting. T he web based lecture was l ed by the researcher and used the screen capture technology Capto to record the sc reen as he discussed and displayed examples of underlying Photoshop concepts, starting a Photoshop project, Photoshop tools, and completing a Photoshop project. v iewing in the Module 5 section of the EME2040 Canvas course website for the
50 treatment condition sections; learners could watch it whenever convenient for them, as long as it was prior to the Module 5 face to face class meeting. Along with viewing the web based lecture, learners in the sections implementing the FC model were to complete the Photoshop Tools Handout asynchronously prior to the Module 5 face to face meeting. The Photoshop Tools Handout which can be found in Appendix I, was an activity to gi ve the learners an opportunity to practice minor aspects of what they learned from the lecture. This assignment is not worth a significant amount of points and was not collected as data for the study Instead, it was simply reviewed by EME2040 instructors It also helped learners with their future assignments by introducing them to using the Photoshop application and its interface. It asked learners to find fourteen Photoshop tools on the Photoshop interface and to insert scre enshots of these tools in a table. All of the tools that the learners were required to find in the handout were used at some point in the Practice Assignment assessment that occurred later in the study Garrison and Vaughan (2008) describe activities that act as a bridge between the content and the future activity as and completed by participants asynchronously through Module 5 of the EME2040 Canvas course website. For the control condition sections (those employing typical EME2040 instruction) the lecture and the Photoshop Tools Handout took place during the Module 5 face to face cou rse meeting. Prior to this face to face meeting, the researcher met with the other two EME2040 instructors to train them on how to best deliver the lecture, facilitate
51 the short discussion, and organize the rest of the instruction for Module 5. As part of the training, the two instructors viewed the web based lecture that the researcher had recorded and were supplied with the same script that the researcher used to present the web based lecture (this lecture script can be found in Appendix J) The researche r also informed the other instructors to explain and display through a projector the on screen actions taken while giving the lecture, providing the instructors with explicit instructions on examples to show participants as they lecture about Photoshop. Th e instructors were also told by the researcher to encourage the learners to follow along by performing the same examples being explained on their own computers. As for the short discussion, the researcher gave each instructor a script that included the top ics that the discussion should cover (this discussion script can be found in Appendix K) This in their face to face lectures and discussions, so all participants recei ve consistent instruction. Module 5: All About Images (Part 1) was the EME2040 module in which the implementation of the two instructional methods occurred. Table 2 3 provides a summary of the two different conditions and the instructional events that take place. Table 2 3 Module 5 Treatment and Control Condition Instructional Events Treatment Condition Sections Control Condition Sections Before the face to face meeting (Online): 1. View web based lecture on Photoshop tools 2. Photoshop Tools Handout completed online During the face to face meeting: 1. Short discussion on the material and the upcoming assignment 2. Practice Assignment During the face to face meeting: 1. Live Lecture on Photoshop tools 2. Photoshop Tools Handout completed in EME2040 classroom 3. Short discussion on the material and the upcoming assignment After the face to face meeting (Online): 1. Practice Assignment (assessment)
52 Control condition sections of EME2040 received their lecture from their respective instructors during the Module 5 face to face class meeting. This lecture las ted about the same amount of time as the web based lecture (25 30 minutes), as instructors explained the various Photoshop concepts and provided examples projected on the screen in the front of the EME2040 classroom. Participants were encouraged by their i nstructors to follow along on their own computers. This lecture occurred in a different room than the original EME2040 classroom (due to the burst pipe mentioned earlier), but the new classroom was another computer lab with the same models of computers at each seat. Following the live lecture, participants in the control condition sections completed their Photoshop Tools Handout on the computer lab computers. For the final five minutes of the face to face meeting, the instructor facilitated a short discussi Assignment an communication with the learners so that they are clear about the rationale and coming Practice Assignment (Garrison & Vaughan, p. 115). Finally, the face to face meeting for the control condition sections concluded with the instructor assigning the Practice Assignment to be completed asynchronously as homework. This assignment was to be completed by participants individually any time before the next face to face meeting (Module 6). Instructors also reminded participants to label their assignments with only their ID codes instead of their names.
53 As stated earlier, treatment condition s ections of EME2040 viewed the web based lecture and completed the Photoshop Tools Handout activity asynchronously, prior to attending the Module 5 face to face meeting. Just like for the control condition sections, treatment condition Module 5 meetings cou ld not be held in the original EME2040 classroom (due to the burst pipe). Two treatment condition sections were held in the same computer lab as the Module 5 control condition sections (with the same computer lab computers as the typical EME2040 classroom. The final treatment condition section, however, was held in a classroom that did not have computers (due to UF classroom scheduling conflicts). For this class, participants worked on their personal laptops instead of computer lab computers. This face to face meeting in these FC model sections began with the same short discussion that the control condition sections ended with, covering the same topics to ensure consistency. Following the conclusion of the discussion, the rest of the face to face meeting ti me was used for participants to complete the Practice Assignment. While the participants were in the act of completing the assignment, the instructor provided support and assistance to learners while also encouraging learners to have discussions, assist on e another, communicate, and collaborate (this was also part of the training that the researcher shared with other EME2040 instructors prior to this module). The cen tered opportunities in class for greater teacher to student mentoring and peer to completed their Practice Assignment during the Module 5 face to face meeting; those who did no t, however, finished it as homework prior to the Module 6 face to face
54 meeting. Instructors also reminded participants to label their assignments with only their ID codes instead of their names. After the participants submitted their Practice Assignments via the EME2040 Canvas course website, files were immediately downloaded so that only the ID codes names. The instructors assessed each assignment based on the Practice A ssignment correlating Practice Assignment scores to the researcher for data storage in the ME2040 sections in which the researcher taught, however, all Practice Assignments were assessed with the assistance of one of the other EME2040 instructors. This ensured that bias did not influence the results, and helped contribute to more consistent grad ing between instructors. When assessment of the Practice Assignments was complete, the scores were saved securely with the correlating ID codes in the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. For the rest of the study, the events for both the treatment condition secti ons and the control condition sections were held constant. For the next module, Module 6: All About Images (Part 2), participants arrived at their Module 6 face to face meeting and received directions about the Transfer Assignment, the next instructional e vent of the study. Instructors also reminded participants to label their assignments with only their ID codes instead of their names. The rest of the Module 6 face to face meeting was dedicated to allowing participants to brainstorm ideas for this Transfer Assignment and start to work on it for those who were ready. After this meeting, participants were to
55 complete the Transfer Assignment asynchronously and submit it via the EME2040 Canvas course website prior to the Module 7 face to face meeting. After th e participants submitted their Transfer Assignments, files were immediately downloaded so that only the ID codes labelling the assignments could be Prior to grading these Transfer Assignments, the r esearcher met with the other two EME2040 instructors to discuss consistency using the Transfer Assignment Rubric. Because this assignment and its rubric were more open ended and subjective than the Practice Assignment, it was necessary to find consistent, common ground in grading and establish inter rater reliability among instructors (Gwet, 2014, p. 4) To do this, the researcher and the two other EME2040 instructors independently graded the first 28% (20 out of 72) of the Transfer Assignments that were submitted Scores for each individual submission were discussed in depth, with conversations between instructors covering the rubric, professional appearance, theme, and proof of mastery over Photoshop concepts This lead to vastly improved consistency in grading among instructors by the end of the meeting. The instructors assessed the rest of the Transfer A ssignment s independently Transfer Assignment scores to the resea rcher for data storage in the Microsoft Excel which the researcher taught, however, all Transfer Assignments were assessed with the assistance of one of the other EME2040 instr uctors. When assessment of the Transfer
56 Assignments was complete, the scores were saved securely with the correlating ID codes in the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The last events of the study for the participants took place during the Module 7 face to face meeting. Participants arrived at the meeting, logged on to the computer lab computers in the EME2040 classroom to complete the Photoshop Post test. Participants inputted their ID codes and took this 10 item, multiple choice assessment that was presented o nline using Qualtrics. After participants completed the Photoshop Post test, they were asked to complete the Learner Satisfaction Survey. This was also presented online using Qualtrics and completed on the computer lab computers in the EME2040 classroom. W hen participants were finished with this survey, events of the study were officially complete. The rest of the Module 7 face to face meeting was used for EME2040 instruction that was unrelated to the study. After the Module 7 face to face meetings, the res earcher collected the scores from the Photoshop Post test and the data from the Learner Satisfaction Survey and securely inputted it into the Microsoft Excel data sheet for data analysis. Only after data analysis was complete and results were recorded did the researcher open the original Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that contained the participant names and correlating ID codes to give the participants EME2040 course credit for the assignments that took place during the study. When the data analysis process w as complete, the results of the study were recorded, and all participants had received appropriate EME2040 course credit, the researcher deleted both Microsoft Excel spreadsheets permanently. Data Analysis T his study employed the Analysis of Covariance ( A N A COVA ) and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) model s to compare the mean response between the treatment
57 group and the control group in terms of the learner achievement and learner satisfaction quantitative data (Keith, 2014, p. 155) An AN A COVA was run on the l earner achievement data from the Photoshop Pre test/Photoshop Post test, while ANOVAs were run for the Practice and Transfer Assignments and the Learner Satisfaction Survey. was used to test if homogeneity of varianc e was equal across groups (Brown & Forsyth, 1974, p. 364) The researcher also tested for normality by examination of skewness and kurtosis. The statistical software SPSS Version 24 was used to analyze the data in this study. Validity and Reliability Demographic surveys have been used in numerous empirical studies and validated by many researchers. The learner achievement assessments used in the study have specific performance tasks and the rubrics used to score the achievement of the learners have det ailed criteria to ensure dependabil ity. The researcher and the other EME2040 instructors met to establish inter rater reliability (Gwet, 2014, p. 4). The survey used to measure learner satisfaction was used in an empirical study and was validated by resear chers. The participants of this study are representative of the target population (undergraduate learners with diverse demographic and academic backgrounds). Chapter 2 Summary This study employed a quasi experimental pre test/post test design consisting of two groups: the treatment condition ( EME2040 sections in which instructors implemented the FC model for the module that was the focus of the study) and control condition ( EME2040 sections in which instructors taught the module using typical EME2040 instru ction). The implementation of the FC model was the independent
58 variable in this study, while the dependent variables included learner achievement and learner satisfaction. Participants were undergraduate students at UF who registered for EME2040 for the Fa ll 2017 semester. These UF students were not aware of this study existing when they registered to take the course. The three EME2040 instructors (the researcher and two others) met weekly throughout the Fall 2017 semester to discuss the research study plan s and for training to increase consistency between instructors. Three EME2040 sections were chosen for the treatment condition (implementing the FC model) and two EME2040 sections were chose for the control condition (typical EME2040 instruction). Data was collected throughout the study, which lasted from week four of the semester to week seven, using a Demographic/Academic Survey, a Photoshop Pre test, a Practice Assignment, a Transfer Assignment, and Photoshop Post test, and a Learner Satisfaction Survey. All events of the study were held constant between the treatment and control conditions except for those events occurring during Module 5. For this module, the treatment condition implemented the FC model (a web based lecture being viewed and a handout be ing completed prior to class, then a discussion and the Practice Assignment taking place in class) and the control condition employed typical EME2040 instruction (lecture, handout, and discussion taking place in class, then the Practice Assignment complete d as homework after class). This study employed the Analysis of Covariance ( AN A COVA ) and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) model s to compare the mean response between the treatment group and the control group in terms of the learner achievement and learner sati sfaction data
59 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS hat impact does implementing a flipped classroom (FC) model have on learner achievement and learner satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course? r used the statistical software SPSS Version 24 to analyze the responses from the participants on various surveys, assessments, and assignments during the instruction of the undergraduate technology literacy course Introduction to Educational Technology ( EME2040). The instruments used to collect these responses were the Photoshop Pre test, the Practice Assignment, the Transfer Assignment, the Learner Satisfaction Survey, and the Photoshop Post test. The control condition group received typical EME2040 inst ruction while the treatment condition group received instruction using the FC model. Refer to Table 2 2 to view the instructional events that took place throughout this study. This chapter presents the results from data analysis based on the two dependent variables in this study: learner achievement and learner satisfaction. Each of these dependent variables is broken down into analyses of participant responses from the various instruments used to collect the data pertaining to learner achievement and lear ner satisfaction. Learner Achievement Photoshop Pre test/Photoshop Post test The researcher collected and analyzed data from participants using the same assessment (with questions and multiple choice answers in a different order) both prior to and followin g the instruction that was the focus of the study. The researcher coded responses from these assessments as correct (1) or incorrect (0). The maximum
60 amount of points that could be achieved on each of these assessments was eight. The assumption of homogene Variances at F (1,67) = 2.91, p = .09. There were no severe departures from normality for the post test, as skewness was .30 and kurtosis was .78. The descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for these assessments can be seen in Table 3 1. The difference between the treatment and control groups on the Photoshop Post test while controlling for the Photoshop Pre test was not statistically significant at F (1,69) = 0.22, P = .64. Table 3 1. Photoshop Pre test/Post test Descriptive Statistics Pre test Post test M SD M SD Control 3.10 1.51 6.55 1.06 Treatment 3.53 1.87 6.51 1.23 Practice Assignment The researcher collected and analyzed graded scores from the EME2040 Practice Assignment, which had participants follow specific directions to create an image using the Photoshop application. The researcher and EME2040 instructors graded these assignments based on a rubric with a range of 0 4 points, using Test of Equality of Error Variances was statistically significant at F (1,69) = 4.58, p = .04. Procedures required to overco me the assumption of homogeneity not being met were beyond the scope of this study. For the Practice Assignment, skewness was 2.52 and
61 kurtosis was 9.17. Because this was a straightforward and simple assignment for participants, scores were very high, res ulting in the distribution being high. The descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for this assignment can be seen in Table 3 2. For this assignment, the difference between the treatment and control groups was statistically not significant at F (1,71) = 0.52, p = .47. Table 3 2. Practice Assignment Descriptive Statistics M SD Control 3.62 .69 Treatment 3.71 .35 Transfer Assignment The researcher collected and analyzed graded scores from the EME2040 Transfer Assignment, which had participants creatively apply the knowledge they gained from instruction and practice to an open ended project. Ford, Smith, Weissbein, Gully, and Salas (19 218). The researcher and EME2040 instructors graded these assignments based on a rubric with a range of 0 4 points, using increments of 0.5 points. The assumption of F (1,69) = 0.03, p = .87. There were no severe departures from normality for this assignment, as skewness was .06 and kurtosis was .49. The descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for this assignment can be seen in Table 3 3. For this assignment, the difference between the treatment and control groups was statistically not significant at F (1,71) = 0.13, p = .72.
62 Table 3 3. Transfer Assignment Descriptive Statistics M SD Control 2.82 .68 Treatment 2.88 .75 Learner Satisfaction Learner s atisfaction s urvey : The researcher collected and analyzed responses from the Learner Satisfaction Survey, which gathered information pertaining to the scale type survey, with responses coded as i neffective(1), somewhat effective(2), moderately effective(3), effective(4) very effective(5). The maximum score possible on this survey is 50, with a minimum of 10. Test of Equality of Error Variances was statistically significant at F (1,70) = 11 .70, p = .001 ; therefore, the assumption of homogeneity was not met. Procedures required to overcome the assumption of homogeneity not being met were beyond the scope of this study. There were no severe departures from normality for this assignment, as skewness was 1.28 and kurtosis was 1.88. The descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for this survey can be seen in Table 3 4. For this survey, the difference between the treatment and control groups was statistically significant at F (1,72) = 8.77, p = .004 in favor of the control condition Table 3 4. Learner Satisfaction Survey Descriptive Statistics M SD Control 47.19 3.04 Treatment 43.85 5.69
63 Chapter 3 Summary hat impact does implementing a FC model have on learner achievement and learner satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course? responses on various instruments that were designed to measure learner achiev ement and learner satisfaction. These responses came from participants in two groups: the control condition group, which received typical EME2040 instruction, and the treatment condition group, which received instruction using the FC model. The instruments in which the responses were analyzed included the Photoshop Pre test, the Practice Assignment, the Transfer Assignment, the Learner Satisfaction Survey, and the Photoshop Post test. It was found that the difference between the treatment and control groups on the Photoshop Post test while controlling for the Photoshop Pre test was not statistically significant. Results indicated that the differences between the treatment and control groups on the Practice Assignment and Transfer Assignment were also statist ically not significant, demonstrating that there was not a statistically significant difference between groups in terms of the dependent variable learner achievement. In examining learner satisfaction, however, analysis of the Learner Satisfaction Survey d emonstrated that the difference between the treatment and control groups was Variance indicated that the assumption for homogeneity was met for Photoshop Pre te st, the Photoshop Post test, and the Transfer Assignment; however, this assumption was not met for the Practice Assignment and the Learner Satisfaction Survey. There were no severe departures from normality from any of the instruments aside from the Practi ce Assignment.
64 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION With blended learning (BL) environments gaining popularity and even predicted to become the norm in higher education (Norberg, Dzuiban, & Moskal, 2011 p. 4 ) the researcher aimed to contribute to BL knowledge and shed light on the best BL practices in a specific context through this study. The researcher examined two different BL techniques in an undergraduate, technology literacy course and measured their impacts on learner achievement and learner satisfaction. The res earcher collected and analyzed data from the control condition group, in which participants received typical EME2040 instruction (live lecture in class, practice for homework), and the treatment condition group, in which participants received instruction t hrough the flipped classroom (FC) model (web lecture viewed prior to class, practice collaboratively in class). Refer to Table 2 2 to view the instructional events that took place throughout the study for each condition. The goal of this study was to asses s the impact of the FC model on learner achievement and learner satisfaction. Learner Achievement The first part of the research question that the researcher aimed to answer concerns the impact of the FC model on learner achievement in an undergraduate, t echnology literacy course. Following data analysis, it was found that there was no statistical significant difference between the treatment group and the control group in terms of learner achievement. The instruments that collected data that measured learn er achievement included the Practice Assignment, the Transfer Assignment, and the Photoshop Post test (while controlling for the Photoshop Pre test). This indicates
65 that the FC model had no significant impact on learner achievement in this undergraduate, t echnology literacy course. R esearch reviewed prior to the study proposed many advantages of using the FC model that lead to improvements in learner achievement such as the individualized instruction opportunities prior to class meetings and the collaborative practice activity opportunities during class meetings (Davies, Dean, & Ball, p. 3; Garrison & Vaughan, 2008, p. 117) However, the results indicated that t hese proposed advantages either did not occur or did not lead to a significant impact on participants. One possible reason for these advantages not occurring or not leading to a significant impact on learner achievement is the nature of the content of the Photoshop modules being overly simple and not complex. Sweller, Ayres, and Kalyuga (2011) state that learners process information in working memory, and one of the two categories that imposed on working memory (Sweller et al., p. 57). Sweller (1994) states that the primary determinant of intrinsic cognitive load is element i extent to which the elements of a task can be meaningfully learned without have to important characteristics that contribute to element intera ctivity, describing these characteristics to be that a task is simple and that any material that needs to be learned presented in the Photoshop modules that took plac e in this study appear follow these
66 be learned was largely independent of o ther Photoshop skills (for example, learners did not need to understand how to use the paint bucket tool to understand how to use the text tool). This low element interactivity suggests that the information presented during instruction also had low intrins ic cognitive load. This low intrinsic cognitive load is also evident from the high mean scores from both groups on the instruments that assessed the participants on their Photoshop knowledge through low level direct practice and recall (Bloom, 1956, p. 20 ). This includes the Practice Assignment, which evaluated participants based on their ability to follow directions to practice their new knowledge of Photoshop skills, and the Photoshop Post clusion of the study. The researcher is exclusively considering low level assessments that followed instruction to support this explanation, because low level assessments can be expected to reflect more directly on the level of complexity of the material ( because the learner is asked to perform less complex tasks [Bloom, p. 20]) and because participants cannot be expected to have knowledge about a topic prior to instruction (no participants reported that they had extensive Photoshop experience prior to the launch of the study). Thus, the Transfer Assignment, which included higher level Photoshop application rather than a lower level assessment of Photoshop knowledge (Bloom, p. 20), and the Photoshop Pre test, which was completed prior to instruction, were no t considered in this section. For the Practice Assignment, the treatment group recorded an average score of 3.71 ( SD = .35) and the control group recorded an average of 3.62 ( SD = .69) (the
67 maximum points possible was four). For the Photoshop Post test, th e treatment group recorded an average score of 6.51 ( SD = 1.23) and the control group recorded an average of 6.55 ( SD = 1.06) (the maximum points possible was eight). These high scores in both groups, regardless of the type of instruction, indicate that th e Photoshop content presented was not complex, did not have high element interactivity, and did not y of the content and the low intrinsic cognitive load may have eclipsed any differences in instruction as the key factor resulting in the high scores. This is supported by Sweller, who states that ity material with almost any It is worth noting that the other category that imposes a load on working memory uctional (Sweller et al., p. 57). Sweller et al. state that the extraneous cognitive load can be high he learning cognitive load may have minimal consequences when dealing with material that has low element interactivity because the total cognitive load may be relat 310). The fact that the difference between treatment and control groups in terms of learner achievement was statistically not significant, however, is a valuable finding tial impact on learners in
68 this context. An introductory technology literacy course such as EME2040 does not contain highly complex, high intrinsic cognitive load material as components of its curriculum. The results of this study show that these types of courses may not benefit from the FC model, as the form of instruction does not matter when content is simple and has a low intrinsic cognitive load. It is important that educators understand this and evaluate the complexity and the intrinsic cognitive load of the content when considering implementation of the FC model. Learner Satisfaction The second part of the research question that the researcher aimed to answer concerns the impact of the FC model on learner satisfaction in an undergraduate, technology l iteracy course. Following data analysis, it was found that there was a statistically significant difference between the treatment group and the control group in terms of learner satisfaction, with participants favoring the control condition (non FC model). This was displayed through analysis of the sole instrument of the study that measured learner satisfaction, the Learner Satisfaction Survey. While this survey focused on the effectiveness of the instructor, many of its items apply to the delivery of instr uction in general, which stems from the facilitation of course content by the instructor. The treatment group (FC model) responded with an average score of 43.85 ( SD = 5.69) on this survey and the control group responded with an average of 47.19 ( SD = 3.04 ) (the maximum points possible was 50). This indicates that the FC model had a significant impact on learner satisfaction in EME2040, as participants favored the non FC model instruction.
69 Results vary in research when discussing learner satisfaction in using t he FC model. For example, Herrei model due to learner centered advantages such as learners moving at their own pace, the more time allotted for more engaging in class activities, and the easier process for learners who miss class (p. 62). Missildine, Fountain, Summers, and Goselin (2013), however, conducted a study that found that learners were less satisfied with the FC instruction than the other forms of instruction, with learners claimi ng the FC model The results of this study indicate that implementing the FC model in a technology literacy class can have a significant impact on learner satisfaction, le aving learners more dissatisfied than through other methods of instruction. preconfigured to prefer what they are accustomed to, and any new method that is introduced will result in some dissatisfact ion. This is supported by Herrei d and Schiller, who found the FC model to lead to positive satisfaction in the long term, but warned that learners new to the method of instruction may be initially resistant, which could lead to semes ter, as class each week was taught using typical EME2040 instruction (non FC model), and then the new method was implemented solely for Module 5. Another possible explanation for the significantly lower learner satisfaction findings from the treatment con dition is that the web based, video lecture used was
70 poorly designed for the FC model. The lecture that participants watched for the FC model was 26 minutes and 31 seconds long and was comprised exclusively of a he researcher narrated the lecture script. According to Guo, Kim, and Rubin (2014), these characteristics being present in an instructional video can have a negative effect on learner engagement (p. 42), which could lead to lower satisfaction scores. Guo e t al. state that videos that include the so learners can see facial expressions and cues) and videos that are broken up into shorter chunks of less than six minutes are more engaging (p. 45). Mayer and Moreno size of learners (p. 47). Milman (201 videos are short, but also to make certain that all of the steps of the procedure are video design princip les were not followed in designing the lecture used in this study, which could have led to the FC model becoming less engaging, inducing cognitive overload, and frustrating the learners more than assisting them. It is also worth noting, however, that part icipants had viewing the web based lecture (Lawless & Brown, 1997, p. 119). This could have been expected to possibly overcome design issues such as having a video that is not broken up into chunks or segments Learner control pertai ning to viewing the web based lecture includes the learner being able to pause the video, skip ahead, and go back to re watch aspects of the lecture. It is also expected that the learners in the context of this
71 study already have the knowledge of how to co ntrol a web based video lecture, as they YouTube) (Dreon, Kerper, & Landis, 2011, p. 4). The web based, video lecture was essentially the in class, live lecture but recorded on a computer and posted online for learners to view asynchronously prior to the class meeting. While this was a research design decision to increase consistency between conditions, Bishop and Verleger (2013) warn ed that when implementing a FC model, it s hould be more involved ordering of classroom and at statement is made evident in this study, where moving the lecture online without following the appropriate design principles may have resulted in dissatisfaction for learners who partook in the FC model These findings demonstrate that when implementing a new or different instructional method, it is imperative to make sure all instructional materials and resources are designed to support that new m ethod. Limitations While this research was diligently prepared, the researcher is aware of its limitations. One limitation that can have potentially impact ed answer the research question is that the mat erial did not have high en ough intrinsic cognitive load and was not complex enough to allow for the forms of instruction to make a difference (Sweller, p. 308). The content of the modules and the assessments being studied in EME2040 was visual literacy, and it was taught though usi ng the Photoshop application. While one must develop certain skills to become proficient at using Photoshop, this is not content that is exceedingly in depth or di fficult. This could have potentially lead to the learner
72 achievement scores that were predominantly high on the low level assessments of Photoshop knowledge that followed instruction (Practice Assignment and Photoshop Post test), regardless of the instruction that the participants received; this resulted in the researcher being unable to e valuate the impact of the different forms of instruction that were examined This content was chosen despite this limitation so the study could examine a skill based module in the beginning of the semester. In order for the study to meet deadlines, it had to occur early in the Fall 2017 semester. Out of all of the early modules that make up EME2040, this module regarding visual literacy and Photoshop was selected as the best fit for this study. EME2040 modules that typically occur later in the semester and would require a restructuring of modules were not considered so the EME2040 course schedule (and its instructors) would not be disturbed or inconvenienced by the study. The instruction delivered in this study was delivered by three different EME2040 instru ctors: the researcher, and two others. This is considered a limitation because there are inherent differences between the various instructors, resulting in natural differences in delivery and facilitation of instruction. This could have resulted in extrane ous variables affecting data. To counter this, the researcher conducted weekly meetings throughout the study in which the three instructors discussed plans for the following module, and the researcher trained the other instructors on delivery of content an d grading of assignments to encourage consistency. This included the researcher sharing and discussing lesson plans, assignment rubrics, lecture scripts, and discussion scripts.
73 This study did also did not include random assignment and selection of partici pants. This is due to the fact that EME2040 is a course offered at the University of Florida (UF) during the Fall 2017 semester, so learners who needed the course credit registered for this course and eventually became participants (if they agreed to parti cipate). The researcher did not have the resources to conduct a study using participants outside of the course (or content outside of the course), and because the researcher was already an instructor for EME2040, it made sense to conduct the research withi n this course and use the learners who registered for it as participants. The diverse cultural and academic backgrounds typically seen in EME2040 classes factored into this decision as well. Another limitation of this study is the fact that the Photoshop P re test and Photoshop Post test were instruments used in this study that were not validated. These were short, eight item assessments, and included some items that turned out to be too simple. This resulted in KR 20s for these instruments that were not ide al. These instruments were designed by the researcher, and using pilot testing and other validation techniques were outside of the scope of this study. It is also important to note that the Practice Assignment and Transfer Assignment were assessments that were taken from the EME2040 curriculum without any field testing or validation techniques. While field testing is generally conducted prior to launching a study, this was out of the scope of the study due to a lack of time and resources. Finally, t he Learn er Satisfaction Survey that was used in the study focused strongly on the instructor (nine out of the ten survey items focus ed on the instructor).
74 instructor, this f ocus may take away or distract from the goal of gathering learner satisfaction data pertaining to the method of instruction in general It was decided to use this particularly survey, despite its shortcomings for a couple of reasons. First, it was a satis faction survey that was already validated in empirical research and used in a study in which different methods of instruction were being compared. The researcher did not have the time or resources to design and develop a new instrument and test it for vali dity. W hile the survey difference in the two methods of instruction being studied (the FC model and typical EME2040 instruction) Also, many of its items apply to the delivery of instruction in gene ral, which stems from the facilitation of course content by the instructor. The the instructor will shed light on their feelings and satisfaction for the instruction in general Implications and Recommendations for Practice As more institutions of higher education are adopting BL techniques and strategies, educators are finding themselves with countless options of how to deliver instruction. When it comes to using the FC model, this study provides insight on its impact on learner achievement and learner satisfaction in the context of an undergraduate, technology literacy course. The findings of this study demonstrated that the FC model does not have a significant impact o n learner achievement when content or learning outcomes are not complex and do not impose a high intrinsic cognitive load on the working memory of learners (Sweller et al., p. 57). In contexts in which the material includes low intrinsic cognitive load con tent, multiple forms of instruction can be approximately equal in
75 effectiveness, as the simplicity of the content overcomes any differences in instruction. When making decisions about pedagogical techniques, educators need to consider the content they are teaching and choose a strategy that makes sense for that content. In cases where educators have simple, straightforward material to teach, the FC model may not be worth the time and resources it takes to switch to a new form of instruction. This study also illustrated that the FC model can have a significant impact on the satisfaction of learners, leaving them dissatisfied of the new method that is implemented. This could occur because learners are preconfigured and resistant to change, or it may occur when instructional materials are not well designed for the type of instruction that is being used. Educators and decision makers who are considering implementing a FC model should be aware that learners may be dissatisfied early in the implementation. This sho uld not stop them from considering the FC model, however, as makers should also ensure that if a F C model is going to be implicated, all learning materials and resources must follow multimedia design principles so materials are engaging for learners and do not induce cognitive overload (Guo et al., p. 42; Mayer & Moreno, p. 47). Recommendations for Fut ure Research achievement and learner satisfaction using content that is more complex. This would allow the different aspects of the instructional strategies to have more of an imp act on learner achievement. It would also be valuable to take the time and resources to have validated instruments and instructional materials to collect data and use learning
76 materials that are developed following multimedia design principles. Finally, ha ving a study that implements the FC model for a longer period of time would help researchers understand whether the initial dissatisfaction that occurred is temporary or continuous. Conclusion Quantitative evidence from this study found that the FC model had no significant impact on learner achievement and a significant impact on learner satisfaction (in favor of non FC instructional methods) in an undergraduate, technology literacy course. These findings may have been influenced by the ease of the instru materials used in the FC model condition. While the FC model has many advantages and affordances, it does not seem to be the best possible instructional technique in the contex t of this study. These findings, along with discussion of these findings, suggests that more empirical evidence is needed to investigate implementing the FC model with more difficult content, validated instruments, better designed instructional video, and a longer timetable.
77 APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC/ACADEMIC SURVEY A. Please enter the ID code provided by your instructor. ID: What is your age? Age: _____ What gender do you identify as? Please circle your answer. Male Female Other What is your ethnic background? Please circle your answer. White/Caucasian Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other What is your current major at UF? Please include any minors you are pursuing as well. Major/s: _________________ Minor/s (if applicable): ______________ How would you describe your experience with Photoshop? Please circle your answer. No experience Limited experience Moderate Experience Extensive experience
78 APPENDIX B PHOTOSHOP PRE TEST A. Please enter the ID code provided by your instructor. ID: 1. When sizing your workspace before starting a project, which of the following should you use if you are planning to create an image used primarily on the web? a. Inches b. Pixels c. Bytes d. Centimeters 2. What is the most efficient way to make a layer that is hidden beneath other layers visible? a. Use the Move tool and select the desired layer to bring it to the front b. c. Flatten the image so all layers are brought together d. Edit the order of layers listed in the Layers palette so the desired layer is visible 3. What must you do before you can edit a layer? a. Select the layer in the Layers palette b. Make all other layers invisible in the Layers palette c. Bring the layer to the front of the image d. Select Options, then Edit Layer 4. If there is a tool you cannot find, where may it be and how would you access it? a. Nested underneath similar tools, must right click the similar tool to see it b. In the extended toolbox, must search the name of the desired tool c. Nested underneath similar tools, must hover over the similar tool to see it d. In the extended toolbox, must search the Tool Number of the desired tool 5. What is the most efficient way to delete unwanted objects in your image? a. Click the Undo button b. Find and select the unwanted object in the Layers Palette and press Delete c. Find and select the unwanted object in the History Palette and press Delete
79 d. select the object you want to delete 6. What happens if you apply the Gradient tool to your workspace? a. Creates a blend from one object to another b. Creates a blend from major color to minor color c. Creates a blend from primary color to secondary color d. Creates a blend from foreground color to background color 7. How do you move an object in your image? a. Use the Move tool b. Use the Transform tool c. Use the Drag and Drop Tool d. Use the Transport Tool 8. When you are saving an image that you are not finished with, what kind of file should you save it as, and why? a. JPEG/GIF; this does not flatten the layers, so you are able to continue to edit layers individually the next time you work on your image b. JPEG/GIF; this flattens the layers, giving you a simplified and more complete image you can return to for more efficient editing c. PSD; this does not flatten the layers, so you are able to continue to edit them individually the next time you work on your image d. PSD; this flattens the layers, giving you a simplified and more complete image you can return to for more efficient editing
80 APPENDIX C PRACTICE ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS ATTEN TION! Before doing this practice activity you must have all of the following materials saved to your USB: runningshoe.gif basketballshoe.gif soccershoe.gif baseballshoe.gif If you do not have these materials saved to your USB already, return to the Practice page on the lab website and follow the directions listed in the Photoshop section. Do this Practice Activity on a MAC at the computer lab Getting Started 1. Finder Applications Adobe Photoshop CS Adobe Photoshop CS 2. If a window pops up that asks if you want to customize your color settings, click No. 3. File New. 4. Name the document practicephotoshop. 5. Adjust the following dimensions accordingly: Width: 700 pixels (This is an appropriate width for a computer screen. Viewers may have difficulty seein g the entire graphic online if it is any wider than this.) Height: 350 pixels Resolution: 72 pixels/inch (This is the appropriate resolution for web graphics.) Mode: RGB color Contents: Transparent 6. Click OK. Your workspace will appear. The white and grey checkers indicate that this background layer is transparent.
81 7. Drag the bottom right hand corner of your workspace down and to the right so that you can get a full view of your workspace. 8. The top of this workspace window should read workspace. If the listed percentage is higher or lower than l00%, do the following: Locate the Magnifying Glass on the Tool Palette. Click on it. To increase the vie w of your workspace, simply click on the workspace until it reaches 100%. To decrease the view of your workspace to 100%, press and hold the Alt key on your keyboard while clicking on the workspace. 9. Make sure that all of the necessary Palettes are open on your screen. In the main menu, click on Window. In the menu that appears, make sure that all of the following are checked: o Tools o Options o History o Layers 10. Make sure that the ruler is activated. In the main menu, click on View. dimensions for both the width and height.) If the ruler does not give you pixel dimensions (700 x 350), use the main menu to do the following: o Choose Photoshop > Preferences > Units & Rulers. o For Rulers, choose pixels as the unit of measurement. 11. File Save As. document.) o Where: The Practice Folder on your USB o Format: Photoshop (Saving your work as a Photoshop document will allow you to reopen it at a later time to continue working on it, manipulating the layers, etc.) o Click on Save. o NOTE: Saving your graphic as a GIF or JPEG will automatically flatten the layers, making it impossible to move them, reformat them, et c. Therefore, this should be a last step in your process. Renaming Layers 1. Locate the Layers Palette on the right hand side of your screen.
82 2. At this point, we only have one layer our transparent background called 3. When creating a Photoshop you create more and 4. more. To rename this layer, do the following: Double click on the name name. Now type in the new name: background. Then press Return on your keyboard. Using the Paint Bucket to Create a Background Color 1. Locate the Foreground and Background Colors on the Tool Palette 2. Click one time on the Foreground Color icon. 3. In the Color Picker window that appears, drag the arrow pointing to the spectrum to a blue region. 4. In the main color box, point and click on a light blue color. Then click OK. The Foreground Color icon should now be a light blue color. 5. Next click one time on the Background Color icon. 6. In the Color Picker window that appears, point to a white region (top left hand corner) in the color box. Then click OK. The Background Color icon should now be whi te. 7. Now click on the Paint Bucket tool on the Tool Palette. (Some users may need to click and hold on the Gradient tool and then select the Paint Bucket tool from the menu that appears. See pictures.
83 8. Now click on your workspace. The entire layer will turn light blue. Creating a Gradient Background 1. Click on the Gradient tool on the Tools Palette. You may need to click and hold on the Paint Bucket tool to access it. See pictures. 2. Click, hold, and drag a diagonal line from one corner of your workspace to another. Upon releasing your mouse, your workspace will change to a blue and white gradient (a mixture of the Foreground and Background Color you selected). 3. To create different variations of this gradient, experiment with the length and angle of the line you draw on the workspace. Using Filters to Enhance Layers 1. Click on Filters in the main menu. (A drop down list of various filters will appear.) 2. Select Render Clouds. The blue and white background layer you created should now look like a b lue (and slightly cloudy) sky. Creating New Layers Photoshop allows you to create multiple layers when making a graphic. This allows you to isolate and manipulate individual elements of your graphic. Thus layers to this graphic for p aint strokes, shapes, pictures, and text. To create a new blank layer, do either one of the following: 1. Click on the new layer button on the Layers Palette. 2. You can also add a new layer via the main menu. Layer New Layer. 3. For our Double click on the name highlight the name. Now type in the new name: grass. Then press Return on your keyboard
84 Using Paint Brushes 1. Select the Paint Brush tool in the Tool Palette. (Some users may need to click and hold on the Pencil tool and then select the Paint Brush tool from the menu that appears. See pictures. 2. From the brush menu that is now at the top of the screen, locate the Dune Grass brush (1 12). You will have to scroll far down in this menu to locate it. 3. Once you find it, double click on it. 4. Locate the Background and Foreground Colors on the Tool Palette. o Set the Foreground color to light green. o Set the Background color to dark green. 5. Palette. If this layer is not highlighted, simply click on it one time. 6. Now click, hold, and drag across the bottom of the workspace. A grassy surface will appear. 7. Continue to paint until the bottom half of your workspace is covered with grass. Your graphic should look like the picture below: Using the Eraser 1. Click on the Eraser tool in the Tools Palette. 2. In the Layers Palette, make sure that the layer called is not, click on that layer one time.
85 3. Now click, hold, and drag the eraser to clear out a small circle in the grass. (Do not repeatedly click your mouse.) See picture. 4. Notice that the eraser only erases the grass and not the blue/white Palette. (It is the active layer.) Using the History Palette Photoshop takes into account that people are going to make mistakes while creating use your history palette to return to a point when your project was still error free. 1. Locate the History Palette on the right hand side of your screen. 2. 3. erased into the grass layer will disappear. Adding Text 1. Click on the Text tool in the Tools Palette. 2. From the Font drop down menu at the top of the screen, select Arial Black.
86 3. In the Font Size drop down menu at the top of the screen, select 48. 4. Click on the Text Color Palette at the top of the screen. 5. From the Color Picker window that appears, select a darker blue as the color. Then click OK. 6. Click inside your workspace (preferable the top left hand corner). A flashing cursor will appear within the workspace. 7. Type in the following text: Types of Athletic Shoes. Using the Move Tool 1. Click on the Move Tool in the Tools Palette. 2. The text layer that you just created should be highlighted in the Layers Palette. If it is not, click on this layer in the Layers Palette one time. ( The Move Tool will only move the layer that is highlighted.) 3. Now use the Move tool to drag this text layer to the top/center of your workspace. Changing the Order of Layers Photoshop allows you to stack your layers in whatever order you want. Thus far, we have three layers: the blue/white background, the grass, and the text. The order that these layers are listed in the Layers Palette indicates which layers are on the top and bottom of your graphic. Therefore, if the text layer is at the top of the list in the Layers Palette, the text will appear on top in your graphic. If it is listed at the bottom, it will be invisible because the blue/white background will cover it up. 1. Click and hol d on the text layer in the Layers Palette.
87 2. Drag the text layer to the bottom of the list in the Layers Palette. The text will disappear in your graphic because it is behind the blue/white background, which takes up the entire workspace. 3. Now click, hold and drag the text layer back to the top of the list in the Layers Palette. The text will reappear in your graphic because it is now on top of the background layer (and the grass layer as well). Opening Picture Files to Incorporate into Your Graphic You will now access the pictures you saved to your USB before starting this activity. If you have not downloaded/saved the necessary pictures for this activity, return to the Practice page on the lab web site. Follow the dire ctions listed in the Photoshop section for downloading/saving the necessary pictures files. 1. File Open. 2. Click on your USB. 3. Double click on baseballshoe.gif. (This picture will open up in a separate window on top of the project you are currently working on.) 4. Repeat steps 1 3 to open up the remaining pictures: basketballshoe.gif runningshoe.gif
88 soccershoe.gif 5. You now have five windows open within Photoshop. Arrange the five windows in the manner indicated by the picture below. Copying and Pasting Picture Files into Your Project 1. Click inside the runningshoe.gif window. (This will activate the window and bring it to the forefront of your screen. 2. Click on the Rectangular Marquee tool in the Tool Palette. 3. Drag a square around the picture of the running shoe. (In other words, click, hold, and drag from the top left hand corner of the window to the bottom right hand corner of the window.) This will highlight the picture itself. 4. Edit Copy. 5. ow to activate it. 6. Edit Paste. (The picture of the running shoe will appear within your graphic.) 7. Use the techniques described in steps 1 6 to copy and paste the other three pictures into your graphic. 8. Use the Move Tool to move each type of shoe to a diff erent corner of the workspace. (Remember the Move Tool will only move the layer that is highlighted in the Layers Palette.)
89 9. Using the info in the chart below, rename each of the shoe layers. Picture: Layer Name: Baseball shoe (PICTURE) baseball Basketball shoe (PICTURE) basketball Running shoe (PICTURE) running Soccer shoes (PICTURE) soccer Making Layers Visible/Invisible Photoshop gives you the option of making any layer visible or invisible. This allows you to block out certain layers of your graphic so that you can just focus on certain aspects of your work. 1. Locate the eyeball icons on the Layers Palette. 2. Clicking the eyeball icon for a particular layer will make that layer disappear and reappear within your graphic. 10. Using this technique, make all of the following layers invisible : basketball baseball Types of Athletic Shoes Using the Magic Eraser
90 The magic eraser removes the background color from a layer. The running and soccer layers, for example, have a white background that the magic eraser can easily remove. 1. 2. Click and hold on the Eraser Tool in the Tool Palette. From the pop up menu, select the Magic Eraser Tool. 3. Click on the white background of the running shoe. The white background will disappear. 4. Use these same techniques from steps 1 3 to get rid of the white Using the Lasso Tool The lasso tool lets you draw freehand segments of a selection border. This is instance, has two shoes while each of the other shoe layers only has one. With the lasso tool, you can easily cut out that second soccer shoe. 1. is not highlighted, click on it one time. 2. Click on the Lasso Tool on the Tool Palette. (PIC) 3. Click, hold, and drag (in a oval like motion) around the top soccer shoe. Upon re leasing your mouse, the top soccer shoe will be highlighted. See picture.
91 4. Now press Delete on your keyboard. The highlighted soccer shoe will disappear. 5. Click anywhere in your workspace to make the selected region disappear. Rotating Layers 1. 2. Edit Transform Flip Horizontal. (The baseball shoe will point in the same direction as the other shoes.) 3. 4. Edit Transform Rotate. This will put a box around this layer. 5. Hover your cursor about a quarter inch over the top left hand corner of the box. Click and hold your mouse. Dragging your mouse in different directions will rotate this layer. 6. Rotate this layer until the shoe is completely horizontal like the other shoe layers. Then press Return on your keyboard to make the box disappear. Resizing Individual Layers within your Graphic 1. Use the Move Tool to arrange the shoes in the manner indicated by the picture below. (Remember the Move tool will only move the layer that is highlighted in the Layers Palette.)
92 As you can the see, the shoes are too large to all fit within the workspace. Luckily Photoshop gives us the capability to resize individual laye rs within our graphic. 2. 3. Edit Free Transform. A box will appear around the running shoe. 4. Drag the sides and/or corners of the running shoe so that it is approximately 150 pixels in width and 100 pixels in height. (Use the rulers that surround the workspace to guide this process.) 5. When you are satisfied with the size of the running shoe, press Return on your keyboard. 6. Use these techniques to reduce the size of the other shoe layers as well. Each shoe should be approximately 150 pixels wide and 100 pixels high. When finished resizing each shoe, use the Move Tool to arrange your graphic to look like the picture below. Using the Shapes Tool The following will show you how to place an oval shape behind each shoe. See Picture. 1. Click on the Ellipse Tool in the Tool Palette. (Some users may need to click and hold on the Rectangle tool and then select the Ellipse Tool from the menu that appears.
93 2. Click, hold, and drag your mouse across the running shoe. An oval outline will appear. Continue to maneuver your mouse until the oval outline is 125 pixels wide and 100 pixels high (Use the rulers that surround your workspace as a guide.) 3. Upon releasing your mouse a solid oval will appear behind or in front of the does not matter at this point.) 4. Use the Move Tool to move this oval to the position indicated by the picture. Duplicating Layers 1. 2. Layer Duplicate Layer OK. The layer will duplicate itself directly on top of itself, so it will appear that nothing happened. 3. Click on the Move Tool in the Tool Palette. Drag the duplicated layer to the location indicated in the picture. 4. Use the duplicating and moving techniques described in steps 1 3, create the picture you see here. (Also remember that the order of the layers in the Layers Palette determines which layers appear on the top of your graphic. You may need to drag the
94 layers in the Layers Palette up or down to create the picture.) 5. Us e the info in the chart below to rename the shape layers you just created. NOTE: Activating and deactivating the eyeball icon (which appears on the Layers Palette) for each of the shapes will help you identify which shape is which if you lose track. Laye r (these go left to right across the screen) New Layer Name Oval that appears beneath the running shoe Running oval Oval that appears beneath the basketball shoe Basketball oval Oval that appears beneath the soccer shoe Soccer oval Oval that appears beneath the baseball shoe Baseball oval Changing the Colors of Shapes 1. 2. 3. In the Color Picker window that appears, select a bright red color and then click OK. 4. Now use the info in the following chart to change the color of the remaining ovals. Layer Color Basketball oval Bright blue Soccer oval Bright yellow Baseball oval Bright purple Adding More Text
95 1. Click on the Text tool on the Tool Palette. 2. The font type should still be Arial Black. If it is not, choose it from the font menu that appears at the top of your screen. 3. Change the font size to 18. (See the font size menu that now appears at the top of your screen.) 4. Click beneath the running shoe in the graphic. The flashing cursor will now appear in your workspace. 5. Type the following: Running. (The color of the text does not matter at this point.) 6. Click on the Move Tool on the Tool Palette. 7. Move this text label so that it appears directly below the running shoe. 8. labels. See picture. Reformatting Text 1. 2. now highlighted in the workspace. The text formatting bar also appears across the top of the screen. 3. Locate the Color Box that appears in the text formatting bar and click one time on it.
96 4. In the Color Picker window that appears, select white as the color (top left hand corner). Then click OK. 5. Use the techniques described in steps 1 4 to change the remaining text/shoe label s to white. Adding Effects (Blending Options) to Layers Photoshop allows you to add a variety of effects to your layers. For your purposes here, you will add a drop shadow effect to all of the text layers and a bevel and emboss effect to the oval shapes. 1. 2. Click on the Effects button located on the Layers Palette. This will reveal a variety of effects. 3. Select Blending Options. The Layer Style window will appear. 4. Click the words themselves not just the check box). This will reveal a menu of options for adjusting the drop shadow that now appears 5. Enter the following information: o Distance: 10 px (pixels) o Spread: 10 % o Size: 10 px (pixels) 6. Click on OK. 7. Add a Drop Shadow with the same Distance, Spread, and Size to the remaining text layers in the graphic. 8. 9. Click on the Effects button located on the La yers Palette. 10. Select Blending Options. The Layer Style window will appear. 11. the words themselves not just the check box). This will reveal a menu of options for adjusting this effect, which now appears on this shape in the graphic. 12. Enter the following information: o Size: 10 px (pixels) o Soften: 10 px (pixels) 13. Click OK.
97 14. Add the same Bevel and Emboss effect (including the same size and soften dimensions) to the remaining oval shapes in the graphic. Saving Your Work as a Photoshop Document 1. File Save As. document.) o Where: The Practice folder of Your USB o Format: Photoshop (Saving your work as a Photoshop document will allow you to reopen it at a later time to continue working on it, manipulating the layers, etc.) o Click on Save. o Click on Replace. (This will replace the older version that you saved earlier.) Saving your Work as a GIF or JPEG A GIF (or CompuServe GIF) is an appropriate format for a graphic that is the graphic you made contains photograph elements (the shoes), you will save it as a JPEG. (Remember that saving your graphic as a GIF or JPEG will flatten the lay ers making it impossible to reformat them, move them, etc. Therefore, make sure to also save your work as a Photoshop Document. See Above.) 1. Click on File Save for Web. 2. Under Settings, select JPEG. (This is the most appropriate file format for a photograph.) 3. Click on Save. (The Save Optimized As window will appear.) 4. 5. access your folde r, you must click on the arrow that is off to the right of the file name.)
98 6. Click on Save. This will place the photograph (JPEG) into the folder called
99 APPENDIX D PRACTICE ASSIGNMENT RUBRIC Points Criteria 4 Demonstrates mastery over the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to PRECISELY create the final shoes image, including all 8 essential components correctly 3 Demonstrates the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to APPROXIMATELY create the final shoes image, including 6 essential components correctly 2 Exhibits the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to ROUGHLY create the final shoes image, including containing 4 essential components correctly 1 DOES NOT exhibit the ability to find and use Photoshop tool s to manipulate the various images and layers to create the final shoes image; includes 2 essential components correctly 0 Either does not turn in assignment or DOES NOT exhibit the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various image s and layers to create the final shoes image; includes only 0 1 essential components correctly Essential Components: 1. Clouds 2. Grass (two colors) 3. Circles 4. Shoes being uniform (facing the same direction and similar sizes) 5. Title text (font/size/color) 6. Shoe label text 7. Circles (size and colors) Components in correct places and working together in a way that is logical (including shade effect)
100 APPENDIX E TRANSFER ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS This assignment will require you to design an image that correlates to an aspect or theme related to your field of study or area of interest. The goal of the project is to help you apply and develop your design skills and technical Photoshop skills. It is also designed to provide you with a portfolio item you can use professiona lly. You will be required to upload 3 files : 1. A .psd file you create in Photoshop (this is the original file showing all of the different layers) 2. A .jpg file you create in Photoshop (this is the image created from the Photoshop project) 3. A Microso ft Word file explaining your image choice, project rationale, significance, and your design process. Examples of some possible themes include: Starting a new charter school, business, online journal, blog, online media outlet, public relations firm, clas sroom, interview portfolio etc. Examples of some possible products on your theme: Brochure, media pamphlet, image for a lesson plan, promotional poster, promotional t shirt design. The specific requirements for the project are listed in the rubric below. Quality is important, so keep in mind that you should feel perfectly comfortable showing this project to a future hiring/internship manager. Your image dimensions/size should be at least 800X600 pixels You can go higher if you want. Important reminde r: Remember to only use Creative Commons licensed material and to cite your sources in your Word document. You can find a good selection of images from Flickr's Creative Commons area. You probably want to stick with attribution licenses. Of course, you can use your own images as well. Also, keep in mind that your project needs to have purpose, meaning, and rationale which you will detail in your Word file.
101 APPENDIX F TRANSFER ASSIGNMENT RUBRIC Points Criteria 4 Demonstrates mastery over the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to create an image with a clear theme, purpose, or message and a professional, high quality appearance 3 Demonstrates the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to create an image with some type of theme, purpose, or message and a semi professional, quality appearance 2 Exhibits the ability to find and use Photo shop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to create an image with a distant theme, purpose, or message and an amateur, moderate quality appearance 1 E xhibit s the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to create an image with no theme, purpose, or message and a low quality appearance 0 Either does not turn in assignment or DOES NOT exhibit the ability to find and use Photoshop tools to manipulate the various images and layers to create an image.
102 APPENDIX G PHOTOSHOP POST TEST A. Please enter the ID code provided by your instructor. ID: 1. What is the most efficient way to delete unwanted objects in your image? a. Find and select the unwanted object in the History Palette and press Delete b. Click the Undo button c. Find and select the unwanted object in the Layers Palette and press Delete d. obje ct you want to delete 2. If there is a tool you cannot find, where may it be and how would you access it? a. In the extended toolbox, must search the name of the desired tool b. Nested underneath similar tools, must hover over the similar tool to see it c. Nested underneath similar tools, must right click the similar tool to see it d. In the extended toolbox, must search the Tool Number of the desired tool 3. When sizing your workspace before starting a project, which of the following should you use if you are planning to create an image used primarily on the web? a. Pixels b. Inches c. Bytes d. Centimeters 4. When you are saving an image that you are not finished with, what kind of file should you save it as, and why? a. JPEG/GIF; this does not flatten the layers, so you are able to con tinue to edit layers individually the next time you work on your image b. PSD; this does not flatten the layers, so you are able to continue to edit them individually the next time you work on your image c. JPEG/GIF; this flattens the layers, giving you a simpli fied and more complete image you can return to for more efficient editing d. PSD; this flattens the layers, giving you a simplified and more complete image you can return to for more efficient editing 5. What happens if you apply the Gradient tool to your works pace? a. Creates a blend from one object to another b. Creates a blend from foreground color to background color c. Creates a blend from major color to minor color d. Creates a blend from primary color to secondary color
103 6. What is the most efficient way to make a layer that is hidden beneath other layers visible? a. Use the Move tool and select the desired layer to bring it to the front b. c. Edit the order of layers listed in the Layers palette so the desired layer is visible d. Flatten the image so all layers are brought together 7. How do you move an object in your image? a. Use the Transform tool b. Use the Drag and Drop Tool c. Use the Transport Tool d. Use the Move tool 8. What must you do before you can edit a layer? a. Make all other layers invisible in the Layers palette b. Select the layer in the Layers palette c. Bring the layer to the front of the image d. Select Options, then Edit Layer
104 APPENDIX H LEARNER SATISFACTION SURVEY A. Please enter the ID code provided by your instructor. ID: Directions: For the following questions, rate your perception about the Module 5 and Module 6 (All About Images) quality according to the following scale. This survey is anonymous. 1 2 3 4 5 Ineffective Somewhat effective Moderately effective Effective Very effective 1. The instructor's helpfulness and responsiveness to stu dents 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 2. The instructor's concern for student progress 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 3. The availability of extra help for this class 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 4. The instructor's willingness to listen to student questions and opinions 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 5. The instructor's use of examples or illustrations during the instruction 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 6. The instructor's use of challenging questions during the instruction 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 7. The instructor's command of the subject ma tter 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 8. The instructor's ability to make clear and understandable presentations of information 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 9. The instructor's way of summarizing or emphasizing important points during instruction 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5 10. The i nstructor's use of web technologies as aids in instruction 1 ---2 ---3 ---4 ---5
105 APPENDIX I PHOTOSHOP TOOLS HANDOUT Directions: Photoshop app and look for th e tools in the table below. When you find each tool, take a screenshot of that tool and insert it into the table in the appropriate table cell. This will help you prepare for the Shoes Assignment you will be completing this module (all of these tools will be used in the assignment). See the first row of the table for an example. Use Google, the resources provided online in this module, or any other resources to help you find the tools in Photoshop. For instructions on how to take a screenshot, click one of the follow links: Windows Screenshot Mac Screenshot Before you begin making sure all o f the correct palettes are open and available to use on the screen by following these directions: In the main menu, click on Window (menu at the very top of the screen). In the menu that appears, make sure that all of the following are checked: o Tools, Opti ons, History, Layers Photoshop Tool Your Screenshot Magnifying Glass Tool Button to add a new layer
106 Foreground/background color tool Gradient Tool Paint Brush Tool Dune Grass Brush Tool (number 112 in the paint brush menu) Eraser
107 Magic Eraser History Palette Text Tool Move Tool Lasso Tool
108 Ellipse Tool Rectangle Tool Effects (fx) Button ( HINT: it is in the Layers Palette)
109 APPENDIX J INSTRUCTOR LECTURE SCRIPT Things to include in the lecture (open Photoshop and show examples of doing all of this): Intro: describe the purpose of this lecture o Hello class, I hope everyone is doing well, thank you for viewing this lecture in preparation for class next week. I wanted to make this short, online lecture for a couple of reas ons. First, I want to you guys get started successfully and avoid the serious mistakes in the beginning of starting a Photoshop Document that can lead to having to take a lot of time to go back to fix later, or even waste a lot of time in being forced to s tart over deep into a project when you figured out that the project was not set up correctly. o I also wanted to introduce and discuss a couple of over arching concepts about exploring Photoshop, like how to start your project, how to gain an understanding o f the way Photoshop works by using layers and how to manipulate those layers, how to find various tools, how to navigate the various menus that Photoshop offers, how to undo actions if you make a mistake, how to correctly save a project, and a couple other features o Everything I am including in this lecture comes from my experience in teaching this module in the past this Module has been known to be time consuming and very frustrating for students. For those who are not familiar with using Photoshop, there are a lot of mistakes that are very easy to make if you are not careful. My goal is for this lecture to be proactive in keeping you guys away from making those mistakes, so please pay attention and we can have a much more efficient, less frustrating modul e. o You do not have to, but it would be helpful if you opened Photoshop on your We will begin by describing how to start the in class assignment, and what you need to consider going into your assignment. Making a mistake in these early stages where you set the size, the resolution, the view of your window, and more can have a detrimental effect on your assignment and create time consuming headaches in the future. We want to avoi d that, so I will go over how to open a new Photoshop Document. When find the Photoshop App on your computer (it will probably be under apps if you did not specify where to put it), it will ask you if you want to make start a new document or work on an exi o Setting the document to pixels instead of inches: Width: 700 pixels (This is an appropriate width for a computer screen. Viewers may have difficulty seeing the entire graphic online if it is any wider than this.)
110 Height: 350 pixels Resol ution: 72 pixels/inch (This is the appropriate resolution for web graphics.) Mode: RGB color Contents: Transparent Reasons why o Making sure all the correct palettes are open and available to use on the screen In the main menu, click on Window. In the menu that appears, make sure that all of the following are checked: Tools, Options, History, Layers o Zoom enough to where you can see your workspace easily (use magnifying tool for this). o Ruler: In the main menu, click on View. dimensions for both the width and height.) If the ruler does not give you pixel dimensions (700 x 350), use the main menu to do the following: Choose Photoshop > Preferences > Units & Rulers For Rulers, choose pixels as the unit of measurement. Okay, now you will have your Photoshop Document prepared to begin. The size of our document is set, we have all our necessary palettes open on our window, we like the size we are viewing our docume nt at, and the ruler is set. Next, we will go over a couple of over arching concepts that will help you when you are working on your assignment. o Tools and how to find them: right click to see tools UNDER tools t top left Show this with Brush o Layers and how to (use foreground/background colors AND GRADIENT to show this): Name Add new Move behind/pull to front Make it visible/invisible Delete layers SELECT THE LAYER YOU ARE WORKING ON o how to UNDO actions
111 Enhancing layers using Filters in the Main Menu (clouds?) o Click on Filters in the main menu. (A drop down list of various filters will appear.) o Scroll over Render to see the Render menu, then select Clouds. Effects (fx) button, where it is and how to vi ew the options o You guys will read the directions of what to do with it for the assignment, but I just wanted you to be aware of where it is and how to pull the menu open End how to save o PSD when still working, JPEG when finished (this will flatten all l ayers and you will not be able to manipulate them individually)
112 APPENDIX K INSTRUCTOR DISCUSSION TOPICS PROMPT The topics of this in class discussion (~5 minutes) should include: learner questions from the lecture or Photoshop Tools Assignment possible ch allenges while using Photoshop, possible professional a pplications of using Photoshop, and a look ahead to Practice Assignment and Transfer Assignment.
113 APPENDIX L INFORMED CONSENT FORM IRB Study # IRB201702072 Title: Flipped Classroom and its Impact on Learner Achievement and Learner Satisfaction in an Undergraduate Technology Literacy Course Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: The purpose of the study is to examine the best practices for teaching an undergraduate computer literacy course that includes both face to face and online instruction The study will take one specific blended learning strategy, the flipped classroom model, and evaluate its impac t on learner achievement and learner satisfaction by comparing it to the typical instruction that takes place in the technology literacy course EME2040 The study can inform adjustments of the curriculum to improve the learning experience for future EME204 students. What you will be asked to do in the study: Take part in EME2040 instruction and course content, with the addition of short Pre and Post tests and short Demographic/Academic Surveys and a Learner Satisfaction Surveys. These tests and surveys will be distributed and collected during regular EME2040 meeting times. Time required: The only time required for this study will take place during regular EME2040 meeting times Aspects of the study will take place from Module 4 through Module 7. Benefits: While there are no direct benefits for the participant s, the data collected may have significance for improving the learning materials used in the EME2040 and other c urriculum. Compensation: There is no compensation related to this study. Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. The names of the participants will not be used in any research reports or presentations. Your name will not be connected to your responses once data collection is over. The final results will be presented in a pa per and might be sent to research journals for possible publication or used in research conference presentations. No names or other identifying information will be used in reporting the data.
114 Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is com pletely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. The assignments that contribute to course grades for EME2040 will not be reviewed with the participants' names until the data analysis is complete. In other words, identification codes only will be used for all data and assignments throughout the data analysis process. The Principal Investigator will create a Microsoft spreadsheet that links participants' names to their identification codes after the initial data collection in week 4 of the Fall 2017 semester. This spreadsheet will not be opened again until the data analysis process is complete following week 7 of the Fall 2017 semester. Only after the data analysis process is complete will the Principal Investigator use the spreadsheet to link th e identification codes to the names of the students so the scores on these assignments can contribute to their EME2040 course grades. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. You do no t have to answer any questions you do not want to answer. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Max Sommer School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Florida, e mail: email@example.com phone: (661) 607 2945; or Albert Dieter Ritzhaupt, School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Florida, e mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, phone: 352 273 4180. If you have any questions about your rights as a participant in this study, please contact the UF IR B office: Telephone: (352) 392 0433, Fax number: (352) 392 9234, e mail address: email@example.com I have read the procedure outlined above. I voluntarily agree to participate in this study and have received a copy of this description. ______________________ ________ _____________________________ Participant Date Researcher Date
115 LIST OF REFERENCES Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium Allen, I.E., Seaman, J. & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending In. The extent and promise of blended education in the United States Needham, MA : Sloan C http://sloanconsortium.org/sites/default /files/Blending_In.pdf Asef Vaziri, A. (2015). The Flipped Classroom of Operations Management: A Not For Cost Reduction Platform. Decision sciences journal of innovative education 13 (1), 71 89. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA 30 ( 9 ), 1 18 Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay 20 24. Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs John Wiley & Sons. Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B. (1974). Robust tests for the equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association 69 (346), 364 367. Burkhardt, G., Monsour, M., Valdez, G., Gunn, C., Dawson, M. Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Thadani, V., & Martin, C. (2003). 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age. Chen, Y., & Hoshower, L. B. (2003). Stu dent evaluation of teaching effectiveness: An assessment of student perception and motivation. Assessment & evaluation in higher education 28 (1), 71 88. Davies, R. S. (2011). Understanding technology literacy: A framework for evaluating educational te chnology integration. TechTrends 55 (5), 45 52. Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development 16, 563 580 Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill Jr, P. D. (2003). Pretest posttest designs and measurement of change. Work 20 (2), 159 165. Dreon, O., Kerper, R. M., & Landis, J. (2011). Digital storytelling: A tool for teaching and learning in the YouTube generation. Middle School Journal 42 (5), 4 10.
116 Ezziane, Z. (2007). Information technology literacy: Implications on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 10 (3) 175 191 Flipping the Classroom. (2017). Retrieve d July 14, 2017 from http://www.washington.edu/teaching/teaching resources/engaging students in learning/flipping the classroom/ Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D. A., Gully, S. M., & Salas, E. (1998). Relationships of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with learning outcomes and transfer. Journal of applied psychology 83 (2), 218 233 Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2008). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice Routledge. Fulton, K. (2012). The flipped classroom: transforming education at Byron High School: a Minnesota high school with severe budget constraints enlisted YouTube in its successful effort to boost math competency scores. THE Journal (Technological Horizons In Education) 39 (3). Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10 (3), 157 172. Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education 7 (2), 95 105. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines San Fransicso, CA: John Wiley & Sons. alpha reliability coefficient for Liker t type scales. Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education 82 88. Gribbons, B., & Herman, J. (1997). True and Quasi Experimental Designs. ERIC/AE Digest 1 7. Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014, March). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. Proceedings of the f irst ACM conference on Learning scale conference 41 50. Gwet, K. L. (2014). Handbook of inter rater reliability: The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters Advanced Analytics, LLC.
117 Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers' summative practices and assessment for learning tensions and synergies. Curriculum Journal 16 (2), 207 223. Hawks, S. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: now or never?. AANA journal 82 (4) 264 269 Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching 42 (5), 62 66. Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. D. M. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education 14 (1), 1 12 Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantita tive, qualitative, and mixed approaches Sage. Jurczyk, J., Kushner Benson, S. N., & Savery, J. R. (2004). Measuring student perceptions in web based courses: A standards based approach. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 7 (4) 1 14 Ke ith, T. Z. (2014). Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling Routledge. Kleen, B., Rodriguez, S., & Fanguy, R. (2011). A 2011 Review : Computer Literacy Requirements for Degree Programs in US Public Universities and Colleges of Business Kruse, K. (2009). Gagne's nine events of instruction: an introduction. 10 1 4 Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multimedia learning environments: Issues of learner control and navigation. Instructional science 25 (2), 117 131. Lim, D. H., Morris, M. L., & Kupritz, V. W. (2007). Online vs. blended learning: Differences in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 11 (2), 27 42. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing Student Outcomes: Performance Assessment Using the Dimensions of Learning Model Alexandria, VA : Association for Supervi sion and Curriculum Development. Matell, M. S., & Jacoby, J. (1971). Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert scale items? Study I: Reliability and validity. Educational and psychological measurement 31 (3), 657 674. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist 38 (1), 43 52.
118 Milman, N. B. (2012). The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it best be used?. Distance Learning 9 (3), 85 87 Missildine, K., Fountain, R., Summers, L., & Gosselin, K. (2013). Flipping the classroom to improve student performance and satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education 597 599. Murray, M. C., & Prez, J. (2014). Unraveling the digital literacy paradox: H ow higher education fails at the fourth literacy DigitalCommons Kennesaw State University 11 84 100 Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time based blended learning model. On the Horizon, 19(3), 207 216, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748121111163913. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2002). A framework for reporting and interpreting internal consistency reliability estimates. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development, 35(2), 89 103 Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly review of distance education 4 (3), 227 33. Peterson, C. (2003). Bringing ADDIE to life: Instructional design at its best. Journal of Educati onal Multimedia and Hypermedia 12 (3), 227 241. Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of asynchronous learning networks 13 (1), 7 18. Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An oppo rtunity to engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences 105 (2), 44 49 Sahin, A., Cavlazoglu, B., & Zeytuncu, Y. E. (2015). Flipping a college calculus course: A Case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 18 (3), 142 152 Satisfaction. (n.d.). Retrieved July 14, 2017, from https://www.merriam webster.com/dictionary/satisfaction Satisfaction. (n.d.) Retrieved July 14, 2017, from https://en.oxfordd ictionaries.com/definition/satisfaction Siegle, D. (2004). The merging of literacy and technology in the 21st century: A bonus for gifted education. Gifted Child Today 27 (2), 32 35. Sloman, M. (2007). Making sense of blended learning. Industrial and commercial training 39 (6), 315 318.
119 Stokes, S. (2002). Visual literacy in teaching and learning: A literature perspective. Electronic Journal for the Integration of technology in Education 1 (1), 10 19. Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive loa d theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and instruction 4 (4), 295 312. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media. Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education 107 113 126. Tu cker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom. Education next 12 (1) 82 83 UF College of Education Course Descriptions. (n.d.). Retrieved July 8, 2017, from https://education.ufl.edu/educational technology/course descriptions/ Watson, J. (2008). Blended Lear ning: The Convergence of Online and Face to Face Education. Promising Practices in Online Learning. North American Council for Online Learning 1 17
120 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Max Sommer received his Bachelor of Arts Degree in g eography from the University of Florida in December of 2015 He also graduated with a UFTeach Minor. In January of 2016, Max was accepted as a graduate student in the Master of Arts in Education (MAE) in Curriculum and Instruction with an emphas is o n Educational Technology Program at the Univer sity of Florida. In January of 2017, Max began working as a teaching assistant and instructor for the course EME2040: Introduction to Educational Technology. Throughout his academic career, Max has also worked as an Education Assistant for the Education Department at the Florida Museum of Natural History