Putting the Questions First—Flipped Classroom Methods in Animal Ethics Online Teaching and Its Evaluation

Author:

Dieck Katharina1,Grimm Herwig1

Affiliation:

1. Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, 1210 Vienna, Austria

Abstract

Despite the challenges the pandemic presented for university teaching, it opened up opportunities to set up and explore digital teaching formats like never before. This paper presents a case study of teaching introductory animal ethics in a digital format with flipped-classroom methods. The Interactive Literature Lecturing Format (ILLF) was designed along the following criteria: 1. Conformity with students’ varying educational needs; 2. Consistent high level of interaction; 3. Maximum transparency in an application-oriented exam; 4. No further contribution to the workload of the teaching staff; 5. Flexibility regarding online or on-site conversions. Rather than provide the students with input in lecture sessions, the ILLF presents students with selected literature and a list of structured questions. This literature questionnaire serves as the main didactic element that guides the knowledge transfer, the structure of the sessions and the exam. This paper reviews the outcome of the redesigning process and the steps we took to implement it. To discuss the overall quality of the format from a student’s perspective, the data from the systematically conducted students’ evaluation (n = 65) are interpreted using quantitative and qualitative methods. Bringing these results together with the perspective of the teaching staff, the following question is discussed: did the ILLF meet these criteria? This case study explores the potential and limits of flipped-classroom methods for applied ethics teaching in a university setting.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

General Veterinary,Animal Science and Zoology

Reference10 articles.

1. Regan, T. (1989). Animal Rights and Human Obligations, Prentice Hall.

2. Regan, T. (1984). The Case for Animal Rights, Routledge. [1st ed.].

3. Beauchamp, T.L., and Frey, R.G. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Animal Ethics.

4. Eating Meat and Eating People;Diamond;Philosophy,1978

5. Virtues and Animals: A Minimally Decent Ethic for Practical Living in a Non-Ideal World;Abbate;J. Agric. Environ. Ethics,2014

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3