RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2012
www.PosterPresentations.com
The flipped classroom activity with
Poll Everywhere, is a powerful
teaching-learning method.
Mr. Rohit Kumar Verma, Mr. Hasnain Zafar Baloch
Exploring the Flipped Classroom by Using Poll
Everywhere
Kumar Shiva Gubbiyappa1, Ankur Barua2, Biswadeep Das3 , Hasnain Zafar Baloch4
1School of Pharmacy, 2,3School of Medicine, 4Department of Learning Resources,
International Medical University, Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur-57000, Malaysia.
Introduction
Active Learning
Interactive approach
Tools Used
Audience Response
System (ARS)
Feedback Questionnaire1
Material & Methods
FC @ IMU
Objectives
Pharmacy students’
perception on Flipped
Classroom (FC) using Poll
Everywhere ARS.
Effectiveness of FC activity
as a teaching-learning
method.
Our findings were similar to Gardner
et.al. (2006)2, Litzenger et.al. (2011)3
and Olds et. al. (2011)4 - Pharmacy
students expressed a high
preference for FC instead of the
traditional instructor-led lectures.
Pierce R et.al.1 - Vodcasts and
Active-Learning Exercises in a
“Flipped Classroom” Model of a
Renal Pharmacotherapy Module
reported that student performance
significantly improved during final
examination.
Discussion
Conclusion
Randomly selected 112 complete
responses were included in final analysis.
There were 47(42.0%) male and
65(58.0%) female respondents.
The overall Cronbach’s alpha of
feedback questionnaire was 0.912.
The low or middle achievers of Quiz
session (pre-test) during the FC activity
were 3 times (95%CI = 1.1-8.9) at risk of
providing neutral or negative feedback
than high achievers (p=0.040).
Those who gave neutral or negative
feedback on FC activity were 3.9 times
(95%CI=1.3-11.8) at risk of becoming
low or middle achievers during the End
of Semester Examination (p=0.013).
Data Collection
Results
Recommendation
Multi-disciplinary approach with a
multi-centric, randomised controlled
trial is recommended.
References
1.Pierce R, Jeremy Fox J. Vodcasts and Active-
Learning Exercises in a “Flipped Classroom” Model
of a Renal Pharmacotherapy Module. American
Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2012; 76(10):
196.
2.Gardner S. Preparing for the Nexters. Am J Pharm
Educ. 2006;70(4):Article 1.
3.Litzenger T, Lattuca L, Hadgraft R, et al.
Engineering education and the development of
expertise. J Eng Educ. 2011;100(1):123–50.
4.Olds B, Johri A. Situated engineering learning:
bridging engineering education research & learning
sciences. J Eng Educ. 2011;100(1):151-85.
Source: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765616415/Flipped-classrooms-Turning-learning-upside-down.html?pg=all
Study Design:
Non- randomized trial on
interrupted time series
Study Period:
Four months (1st July
to 30th Nov 2013)
Inclusion Criteria:
All undergraduate
students of Pharmacy
(Semester 5), who gave
informed written consent
Data Analysis:
Epi-info version 5.0 and
SPSS version 17.0Proportion & McNemar’s
Test
Here, p-value <0.05 was
considered as significant
Study Population:
Normal deviate for
95% CI = 1.96
Proportion of
expected positive
feedback - at least 50%
Absolute precision of
estimate - 5%
Total eligible
population -156
undergraduate
Pharmacy students.The minimum sample
size for this study - 112
Exclusion Criteria:
Eligible students who
were absent on the day
of FC activity
Incomplete Quiz or
feedback questionnaires
Ethical Considerations:
Ethical approval from School of
Pharmacy, IMU
Informed written consent
Confidentiality maintained
Sampling Method: Simple random sampling -
electronically generated
random numbers
Data Collection
Procedure:
Pilot study was
conducted one month
earlier
Feedback questionnaire1
was further refined
Four i-lectures and pre-
reading materials –
uploaded on e-learning
portal two weeks before
the FC activity
Setting:
Department of Life Sciences,
School of Pharmacy at IMU
Table1: Proportion of Individual Responses on Feedback Table2: Comparison between FC Quiz Result (pre-test) and
End of Semester Examination Result (post-test)
