This document discusses the implementation of a flipped teaching model in a bioethics course at the University of Leicester. It outlines the evolution of the curriculum, student engagement challenges, and assessment strategies, while also providing feedback from both students and staff on the effectiveness of the approach. The document emphasizes the importance of ethics in bioscience education and aims to enhance student understanding of bioethical issues through innovative teaching methods.

1. Adventures in Flipping theTeaching:
A bioethical example
Dr Chris Willmott
Dept of Molecular & Cell Biology
University of Leicester, UK
cjrw2@le.ac.uk
STEMTeaching & Learning Conference 2019

2. Overview
• What is “flipped teaching”?
• Context: Bioethics in Yr 2
• Why have I adopted a “flipped” approach?
• What advice do I have for anyone considering
adopting a flipped model?

3. Terminology
• Flipped learning:
“Flipped learning is a pedagogical approach in which
the conventional notion of classroom-based learning
is inverted, so that students are introduced to the
learning material before class, with classroom time
then being used to deepen understanding through
discussion with peers and problem-solving activities
facilitated by teachers.”
AdvanceHE
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/flipped-learning-0

4. Terminology

5. QAA Subject Benchmark Statement for Biosciences
Three editions: 2002, 2007, 2015
Ethical implications of discipline
have been prominent in all three
versions
Context: QAA Benchmark

6. Evolution ofYr2 Bioethics
A cautionary tale A work in progress

7. Evolution ofYr2 Bioethics
• BS2060 Research Skills (2004-2014)
- 7 lectures: Introduction to ethics
6 themed – PGD, gene therapy, etc
- Assessment (from 2009) “Headline Bioethics”
Analysis of bioethical news story
25% of module mark
- Bioethics consistently most popular component of
the module
(“stimulated interest” 4.32 out of 5 in 2011-12)

8. Evolution ofYr2 Bioethics
2014 – major overhaul of Yr2 curriculum
• Redesign of delivery and assessment
• Research Skills replaced by Research Topic
• Major assignment – students work in groups to write
research grant proposal
• Consequential changes to bioethics component
- fewer lectures
- loss of Headline Bioethics task
- lecture content altered to fit grant writing task
• Opportunity to introduce some case studies

9. Why ethics case studies?
• Case-based teaching promotes*:
- Engagement with topic
- Higher-level skills, e.g. critical thinking
empathy
• Appropriate medium for debate about controversial
issues with legitimate divergence of viewpoint
* e.g. Yadav et al, 2007

10. Evolution ofYr2 Bioethics
• BS2000 Research Topic (first time 2014)
- 4 lectures: Introduction
3 instrumentalist (inc practicalities)
- Working with humans
- Working with animals
- Working with GMOs
- Case studies in tutorial (2 hrs)
- Assessment “Research Proposal”
5% of 60% of module (= 3%)

11. Cases in BS2000
• 8 (semi-)fictional cases prepared for 2 hr tutorial
• Students given week to prepare
• Tutors given guidance notes

12. Feedback 2014
• n= 279
• total of 12 out of 116 comments mentioned ethics
• Lectures generally well received (if mentioned)
• Some students unhappy with group discussion time
being “wasted” on bioethics scenarios
• Some staff uncomfortable with ethics teaching

13. Redesign 2015
• Pre-record lectures (using new lecture capture
software) and release online
- free up tutorial slots
- move case studies to “lecture slot”
• Introductory lecture retained
• Other lectures (working with humans, animals and
GMOs) delivered as series of shorter videos via VLE
• Case studies in lectures 2&3
(4th lecture dropped)

14. Flipped lectures
• e.g. Research involving humans
• 5 lectures – 57 mins total

15. Flipped lectures

16. Lectures (n=311)
Live lectures & Case discussions also recorded
Attendance at lectures monitored
• Lectures
~ 40% (n >120) absent, inc. from lecture 1
• Lecture recordings
video watched by max 20 students (>7%)
lectures 2 & 3 watched by n=4

17. Flipped lectures (n=311)
Research involving
human subjects
Duration Watched
any
Watched
>50%
1: Misconduct 8:34 70 (23%) 58
2: Codes of conduct 7:24 52 (17%) 41
3: UK legislation 23:53 43 (14%) 27
4: Local procedures 11:06 37 (12%) 28
5: Principlism 6:20 28 (9%) 26
• e.g. Research involving human subjects

18. Feedback 2015(a)
• n = 311
• questionnaire format STOP – START – CONTINUE
• total of 23 comments re ethics
• Lectures:
- “I found the ethics lectures very interesting”
- “Ethics lectures really helped when writing the
research proposal”
- “[Continue] bioethics lectures as they are really
interesting and can be useful in the future”
- “The case study lectures were really interesting”

19. Feedback 2015(b)
• Lectures:
- “Ethics lectures still seemed rather pointless as
they did not (and could not really) relate to our
particular topic”
- “They were interesting but as they didn’t count
they were not a priority”
- “Less time spent on ethics didn’t reflect marks for
it on project”
- “The bioethics lectures could be cut shorter”
- “Sort out the bioethics lectures properly”

20. Interim conclusions
• Panopto is excellent tool for preparing flipped
lectures
• But… pre-recording lectures is time consuming
(the first time through) – planning script, recording,
re-recording and editing
• You can’t please everyone all of the time
• Assessment “carrot” still main driver of student
engagement

21. Changes in 2016
• Altered scheduling
2015: Intro – Cases 1 – gap – Cases 2
2016: Intro – gap – Cases 1 – Cases 2
• Doubled weighting for ethics component of
Research Proposal assignment (10% of 60% = 6%)
With increase from 500 to 1000 words.
• Blackboard quiz (formative) to encourage viewing of
flipped videos

22. Feedback in 2016 (Students)
• Open text question in formative quiz
• Emerging themes:
- duration v number
- sound quality
- time commitment & priorities
- additional formats

23. Feedback in 2016 (Staff)
• It was noted that students had watched fewer
videos (using Panopto data) than they claimed (in
the formative quiz)
• Academic staff felt the increase 500 to 1000 words
for ethics component had led to more waffle not
valuable content

24. Changes in 2017
• Ethics component kept at 6% of mark, but format
altered to be in style of ethics application form
• Additional video to explain the ethics form
• Several videos altered:
- 2 videos (Humans 1 and Humans 2) re-recorded to
remove irritating buzz, 1 intentionally left unaltered
- Music track added to two videos
(Animals 5 and GMO 3)

25. Summary so far…
• Bioethics in core Research Topic module for all
Yr 2 Bioscientists. Team-based assessment involves
students completing grant proposal, including
ethics form
• QAA benchmarking statements include expectation
that all students have basic understanding of
bioethics issues
• By 2017 there are total of 15 online videos
(duration 3:30 to 23:30 mins)
replacing 3 previous F2F lectures
• Formative online quiz

26. Not so flipping easy?
What factors influence engagement?
 Focus group (n=5)

27. Conclusions (thus far)
• Limited engagement (despite refinements) is
disappointing
• Students are strategic
- intention that 100% would watch all videos
- reality = allocated roles within team
= only watched videos re their topic
• Students are motivated by assessments
- only engaged with “relevant” videos
- saw formative quiz as focus rather than aid

28. Conclusions (thus far)
• Opinion split on Case studies
- Focus group generally liked them
- Several negative comments in module feedback
• Expectation management
- Why are we teaching in this way?
- Advice on how to make most of videos
- Reasons for case study discussions
• Several comments ~ “there was more than one
lecture’s worth of material online”
• 2019 (next week) will reintroduce the 4th lecture,
use time to explain some of the above

29. Considerations for flipped teaching
• Incentivisation? WIIFM?
• What activity will require students to watch?
• Fewer, longer videos v More, shorter videos?
• Additional resources (e.g. transcripts)?
• Delivery schedule Regular release v Glut?
(stagger release over time, even if ready)
• Sound quality and format
- animation? (VideoScribe? Investment)
- on screen appearance?

30. Acknowledgements
• Matt Mobbs
• Gemma Mitchell
• Alan Cann
• David Bridgwood
• University Teaching Excellence Project Fund

31. E-mail: cjrw2@le.ac.uk
Twitter: cjrw
Slideshare: cjrw2
Blogs: www.bioethicsbytes.wordpress.com
www.biologyonthebox.wordpress.com
www.biosciencecareers.wordpress.com
www.lefthandedbiochemist.wordpress.com
Thank you
Any questions?