Pavements Course: Is the Flipped Classroom Model Effective in All
Cases? A Case Study in a Developing Country
Yasmany García-Ramírez
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, San Cayetano Street, Loja, Ecuador
Keywords: Flipped Classroom, Active Learning, University Education, Pavements, Civil Engineering, Developing
Country.
Abstract: The flipped classroom model is one of the active learning techniques which has depicted good results
worldwide when applied to university education, especially in developing countries. This technique has
been employed in several areas of knowledge; however, its application within a Pavements course has not
been reported yet. So, this article aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the flipped classroom technique
applied to this subject. Two research questions related to the influence of the flipped model on both,
students’ final grades and their opinion about its effectiveness were carried out. The experiment was applied
to four groups: two groups took the course with the traditional method while the other two attended the
flipped classroom model. Students from group A-B had to attend a face-to-face lecture, while learners from
group C-D had to watch a pre-recorded lecture before class attendance. As result, students in the traditional
model got better average final grades than those of the flipped one; however, students, in general, were
more satisfied with the flipped model. The flipped model promoted self-learning and proactivity from
students to look for what is unknown to them, which is a quite valuable skill in the field of Civil
Engineering.
1 INTRODUCTION
For decades, institutions worldwide have invested
large amount of resources, to train people in order to
meet the requirements demanded by society.
Unskilled people are highly expensive for society,
because they can waste resources, cause material
damages and even human losses. In most situations,
governments must bear these expenses, which with
limited budgets in developing countries are difficult
to afford. In 2015, the United Nations launched the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which
must be fulfilled until 2030. The fourth of these
goals are related to global education. It refers to
having access to inclusive and quality education to
create sustainable development (UN, 2015). In
response to this initiative, several institutions in
every country have tried to contribute to this
objective.
One of these institutions is the Council of Higher
Education of Ecuador (CES). The CES is
responsible for planning, regulating, and coordinat-
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0250-5155
ting the Higher Education system of the country; and
its relationship between the executive function and
society. The Ecuadorian government has a plan
called "2017-2021 Sustainable Development Plan",
which first goal includes education as a mean to
guarantee a dignified life and opportunities for
everyone (SENPLADES, 2017). In this developing
economy, universities are also concerned about
providing quality education.
One of those universities is the Universidad
Técnica Particular de Loja (UTPL), located in the
south of the country. Several years ago, a trainee
program was launched to improve teaching skills of
the faculty members. Experts in the fields of
pedagogy and related fields guided the trainee
program. To approve the courses, students should
complete 70% as a minimum attendance value and a
minimum academic performance of 70% as well.
The compromise was to apply the developed skills
later in the subjects they are in charge.
Pavement design is one of the subjects taught in
the career of Civil Engineering of the UTPL. This
course teaches students how to calculate the
structural design of flexible, rigid, and articulated
pavement. Traditionally in this subject, students
García-Ramírez, Y.
Pavements Course: Is the Flipped Classroom Model Effective in All Cases? A Case Study in a Developing Country.
DOI: 10.5220/0008397705090516
In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST 2019), pages 509-516
ISBN: 978-989-758-386-5
Copyright
c
 2019 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
509

received a lecture, and then they carried out
problem-solving sessions inside and outside the
class. The instructor detected that some students,
who got the minimum grade, did not reach the
competence in designing the pavement structure.
Thus, the instructor considered that the flipped
classroom model would be an alternative to
overcome this weakness. In this scenario, the
objective of this study was to evaluate the
effectiveness of the flipped classroom method
applied to the subject of pavements. Two research
questions where analysed throughout this work First,
does the flipped classroom model influence the
students’ final grades? And, what is the student's
opinion about the flipped classroom model? In order
to answer these questions four groups of students
participated in the experiment: two groups took the
course with the traditional method and the other two
with the flipped classroom model.
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2
gives an overview of the flipped classroom model,
including some studies in Civil Engineering mayor.
Section 3 describes materials and methods including
details about sample size, course model and
structure, and data collection. Section 4 shows the
results obtained from the experiment, and finally the
principal conclusions are presented.
2 FLIPPED CLASSROOM
MODEL
The flipped classroom is an active learning model,
where students have greater participation in their
learning. In this method, students do not receive a
lecture as in the traditional one. Instead, they study
some academic material before the face-to-face
class. Within the classroom, students participate in
more significant academic activities such as
problem-solving sessions, discussions or games.
With these activities, students develop skills of self-
learning to discover what is unknown for them and
not just absorb passively what the instructor shows
(Le & Do, 2019).
This method has had good results at the
university. With this model, students have more
active participation in their learning process. It is
encouraged their self-learning, and classroom time is
optimized (Milman, 2012; Roehl, Reddy, &
Shannon, 2013). As a result, pupils develop creative
skills to tackle real-world problems, work actively as
a team, and learn collaboratively. These skills are
valuable in the work field. Currently, given
technological advances, students prefer these
innovative methods than traditional ones (Bates &
Galloway, 2012; Subramanian & Kelly, 2019) since
they are more familiar with the use of electronic
devices and the use of Internet. Because of these
pros, this method has been extensively used
worldwide by several areas of knowledge.
Specifically, in Civil Engineering, several
studies have been conducted using the flipped
classroom technique. For example, in water
resources subject, learners improved their
conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills
(Li & Daher, 2017). Students of the subjects of
mechanical engineering, computing, and
construction materials admitted that the method had
a positive impact on their learning (Gardner, Willey,
Vessalas, & Li, 2014). In the subject of Transport
Engineering, students were satisfied with the flipped
learning, since they had the opportunity to work at
their own pace, interact with the instructor and work
collaboratively with their classmates (Karabulut-
Ilgu, Yao, Tarmo, & Jahren, 2016). Also, in Static
subject, the method encouraged their self-learning,
and pupils actively assumed their learning (García-
Ramírez, 2018). In a mechanics of materials course,
learners who received it with the flipped classroom
method performed better than the students who
received it with the traditional approach (Lee,
Hackett, & Estrada, 2015). In a dynamic course,
students improved their learning experience and
their ability to solve problems (Fredericks et al.,
2013). In classical mechanics course, most students
were satisfied with the flipped model (Bates &
Galloway, 2012). Despite these good academic
experiences and results, the flipped model has not
applied to the pavements design subject in Civil
Engineering.
3 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Sample Size
Four groups participated in this study to answer both
research questions. Group A and B took the course
with the traditional model, while Group C and D
took it with the flipped model. Group A had 37
students, and Group B had 31. Both were in the
April-August 2017 academic period. Group C and
group D had 33 and 24 students, respectively. Both
groups enrolled in the course in April-August 2018.
All groups were attending their fourth year of Civil
Engineering at the UTPL. The instructor was the
same in all groups.
2ETI 2019 - Special Session on E-Learning and Educational Technological Innovation
510

3.2 Course Model Details
In the traditional model, students received a lecture
every week. A random short test was taken by the
instructor; at the beginning of the class. This test
aimed to know if learners read the topic of the week.
During face-to-face class, students participated in a
problem-solving session either individually or in
teams. Then, they had to resolve other problems as
homework. The activities in-class and extra-class
had a score of 30% of the final score grade, while
the reading controls had a weight of 20% and the
midterm value of 50%.
In the flipped model, students had to watch
videos of pre-recorded lectures before the face-to-
face class. Videos were planed and made for the
instructor. Then, videos were uploaded to the
YouTube platform and their links were shared
through the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE).
Videos were available online throughout the whole
course, so learners could go back to review them
whenever they needed to. In-class, students asked
the professor about the unsolved issues related to the
videos and the weekly topic. Students took a reading
control every week. They also participated in
problem-solving sessions. After this class, students
solved other problems as extra-class assignments.
Both models had 1 hour of a weekly tutoring
session. The scores were similar to the traditional
model.
3.3 Course Structure
The course was structured based on the 16 weeks, as
can be seen in table 1.
The four groups had the same course structure.
Table 1 also included the duration of the pre-
recorded lecture of the flipped model. In the first
class and the last one, and de midterms, there were
no any pre-recorded lectures, because of the topic
and the activities planned in that week. Videos lasted
between 16 to 43 minutes. Previews researchers had
considered a duration between 20 min (Enfield,
2013) up to 1 hour (Sohrabi & Iraj, 2016). Pre-
recorded lectures were made using digital slide
presentations with voiceovers in Microsoft
PowerPoint software.
Table 1: Pavements course structure in the traditional and
flipped model.
Week
Topic
Duration
mm:ss
1
Introduction to pavements
-
2
Traffic study
32:01
3
Soil study for the design of
pavements
26:10
4
Soil stabilization
29:08
5
Flexible pavement structural
design for highways – Asphalt
Institute method
21:47
6
AASHTO flexible pavement
structural design for highways
26:23
7
SHELL flexible pavement
structural design for highways
19:47
8
Midterm
-
9
PCA rigid pavement structural
design for highways
37:04
10
AASHTO rigid pavement
structural design for highways
18:00
11
Articulated pavement structural
design for highways method
43:13
12
FAA flexible pavement structural
design for airports
24:19
13
PCA and FAA rigid pavement
structural design for airports
16:08
14
Failures in Pavements
39:36
15
Maintenance & Rehabilitation –
Pavement
-
16
Midterm
-
- There was no any pre-recorded lecture.
3.4 Data Collection
Data collection consisted in collecting the final
grades of each group and applying a survey to assess
whether students like the new technique. Final
grades were calculated based on what students
achieved throughout the semester, according with
what was described in the section of Course Model
Details. A histogram was built with their individual
grades, to figure it out the differences among groups.
Descriptive statistics for final grade were calculated
for every group in order to compare the results.
Finally, an ANOVA analysis was performed using
95% level of confidence. This analysis helped to
determine whether there was a significant difference
among mean scores from both groups.
The survey was optional: 33 students were
willing to answer in group A, 25 in group B, 31 in
group C, and 23 in group D. The survey had ten
questions related to the course and its methodology.
In the first two questions, learners rated the course
and their self-learning based on their impressions,
questions were:
Pavements Course: Is the Flipped Classroom Model Effective in All Cases? A Case Study in a Developing Country
511

1 How many points would you give to the
Pavements course?
2 How much did you do in the learning of the
Pavements course?
From questions 3 to 10, they had to answer
questions based on a five-point Likert scale selecting
from: strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor
disagree, disagree, strongly disagree:
3 The topics of the subject were interesting.
4 The number of problems performed in class
was enough.
5 The problem-solving carried out in class was
representative of each topic.
6 Other activities carried out in class (tests, team
work) were enough.
7 The instructor showed knowledge about the
subject.
8 The grading of homeworks, lessons, and exams
was fair.
9 The learning method was implemented well by
the instructor.
10 This method should be employed in other
subjects of civil engineering.
A final question was asked about the changes
that they would suggest for the next Pavement
course.
4 RESULTS
4.1 Final Course Grades
The final average score grades were: 71.97 (group
A), 73.84 (group B), 68.21 (group C), and 71.71
(group D). An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was
carried out using the statistical software Minitab
14.2 (State College, 2005). This test determined
whether the difference between the average values
between groups was statistically significant. Those
values should not differ in a 95% level of
confidence. Results show that groups with the same
method did not show any statistical difference:
traditional (p-value = 0.270) and flipped (p-value =
0.081). Scores from group A differ significantly
from group C (p-value = 0.030), but not from group
D (p-value = 0.875). Scores from group B differ
significantly from group C (p-value = 0.000), but not
from group D (p-value = 0.061). Finally, scores from
the traditional model (group A and B) were
statistically different from the flipped model (group
C and D) (p-value = 0.003). Which means that with
the flipped classroom model influences the students’
final grades, but in this case, it does negatively. In
previous literature, students got higher scores in the
flipped classroom than in the traditional class.
To verify if the traditional model has better
performance than the flipped one; other elements
related to the scores were analysed. First, the
maximum score that students can get is 100 points,
and they needed 70 to pass the course. The
percentages of students who passed the subject were:
62%, 74%, 48%, and 50%, for group A, B, C, and D,
respectively. Again, with the traditional model, more
students approved the course than in flipped
classroom model.
Another element is to observe their score
distributions and compared it between groups, as
seen in figure 1. Figure 1 shows that most students
got their score around the minimum value to pass the
subject. Also, the flipped classroom model got the
maximum values but also the minimum one.
Considering that the previous element did not show
a clear trend, students' performance was analysed
inside the groups, to compare then between groups.
Figure 1: Final score grades and student percentages for
all research groups.
This analysis was performed using the score of
the first part of the semester (1-8 weeks) and the
score in the second one (9-16 weeks). It calculated
the differences between those scores. In this case, 31
students from group A got an equal or higher score
than the first part, so did 21 students in group B, 18
in group C, and 18 in group D. Those students had
made good progress in the second part of the
semester. The traditional model "allows" students to
get better scores than the flipped classroom; or
maybe the traditional model got better results
because group A and B have good students, that the
flipped classroom model does not have. Also, this
explains the percentages of students who passed the
subject in traditional groups.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Student percentages (%)
Final score grades (points)
Group A (Traditional)
Group B (Traditional)
Group C (Flipped)
Group D (Flipped)
2ETI 2019 - Special Session on E-Learning and Educational Technological Innovation
512

4.2 Survey Answers
The survey had several parts: rating, selecting
options, and responding to open questions. First,
learners had to rate the applied method and their
self-learning from 1 to 10. In every group, the mean
value was calculated of both ratings. Table 2 shows
those rates for all study groups.
In general, the four groups evaluated the method
with high values. Even though traditional method
applied to group A, and alternative method was
applied to group D delivered higher mean; it was not
statistically different from the other groups (p-
value>0.005). Group A and B the rating of self-
learning statistically differs from group D (p-value =
0.032, p-value = 0.006, respectively), and the rest
ratings did not. It could be said that students
considered that in the flipped classroom model, they
did more for their learning that in the traditional one.
It concluded the same previous studies (Le & Do,
2019; Milman, 2012).
Also, the students answered about the
implemented method with closed-ended questions.
Table 2: Average ratings provided by students in the
traditional and flipped model.
N° of
question
Average ratings provided by students
(1=lowest value and 10=highest value)
Group A
Group B
Group C
Group D
1
9.00
8.68
8.50
8.74
2
7.88
7.28
8.09
8.48
1 How many points would you give to the Pavements
course?
2 How much did you do in the learning of the
Pavements course?
These closed-ended questions had a five-point
Likert scale: strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor
disagree, disagree, strongly disagree. Table 3
includes the percentages of the agreement answers
(agree and strongly agree). Most students for all
groups considered the topics interesting (see Table
3). The number of problems, its representativeness,
and the other academic activities were adequate for
all four groups. In these questions, Group C had the
lowest percentage. Consistently in all groups,
learners considered that the instructor knows the
subject topics, so, it means that the instructor can be
eliminated as a variable that can influence the
results.
On the other hand, it shows a more significant
difference in questions 8, 9, and 10. In general,
students perceived that grading was fairer in
traditional method than in the flipped model. The
same tendency was shown when asked about the
implementation. When the method was better
perceived by students, they would recommend using
it more often in other subjects, than the traditional
method. It seems students did not see the flipped
model benefits because they are used to the
traditional model, as most of their lecturers apply
this technique.
Table 3: Survey five-point Likert scale answers in the
traditional and flipped model.
N° of
question
Percentages of students that agreed
(strongly agree and agree)
Group A
Group B
Group C
Group D
3
97.0
100.0
100.0
95.7
4
90.9
96.0
87.5
95.7
5
90.9
96.0
87.5
95.7
6
87.9
88.0
87.5
87.0
7
97.0
96.0
96.9
95.7
8
84.9
80.0
71.9
73.9
9
87.9
88.0
71.9
73.9
10
75.8
84.0
68.8
69.6
3 The topics of the subject were interesting.
4 The number of problems performed in class was
enough.
5 The problem-solving carried out in class was
representative of each topic.
6 The other activities carried out in class (tests, team
work) were enough.
7 The instructor showed knowledge about the subject.
8 The grading of homeworks, lessons, and exams was
fair.
9 The learning method was implemented well by the
instructor.
10 This method should be employed in other subjects
of civil engineering.
Students answered an open question related to
the changes they would suggest in the next
Pavement course. The answers can be summarized
in five items: no modifications, field visits, the
instructor solve and explain a problem, asphalt
mixtures theory or laboratory, and others. Table 4
shows their percentages for every group. It is
interesting that more students from group C-D
suggested that it should be no modifications to the
course of the pavement compared to groups A-B.
This suggests that the flipped approach was
according to students expectations. Another
investigation agrees on this, and 51% of the pupils
considered that the use of the flipped method was
excellent (Bates & Galloway, 2012).
Students suggested, especially in the traditional
method, that the course should be complemented
with field visits to the pavement in the highways
Pavements Course: Is the Flipped Classroom Model Effective in All Cases? A Case Study in a Developing Country
513

around. They asked this element since the course of
the pavement was developed exclusively inside the
class. Also, they asked that the instructor should
solve and explain an example before students try to
solve their own.
Table 4: Percentage of answers that students suggested
changes in for the traditional and flipped model.
Item
Percentage of student answers what changes
they suggested in the next Pavement course
Group A
Group B
Group C
Group D
a
39.39
36.00
65.63
65.22
b
15.15
16.00
3.13
-
c
18.18
20.00
12.50
8.70
d
9.09
8.00
-
-
e
18.18
20.00
18.75
26.09
a No modifications
b complement with field visits to pavement in the
highways around
c the instructor should solve and explain the problems
first before students solve their own problem example
d teach asphalt mixtures theory or the course should
have a laboratory practices
e others.
- There was no person who suggested this item.
In the course, the instructor delivered the
problems that learners should solve, and then they
analysed other similar solved examples before to try
to solve it. During the problem-solving session, the
instructor was showing some key details and
answers, so students can monitor their progress.
Additionally, they asked that the program should
include asphalt mixtures theory or the course should
have laboratory practices. This requirement was
asked students from group A and B; because
previous pavements courses included those
elements.
Finally, students had several demands, for
example, changing the schedule of the weekly
tutoring session, improving the internet connection,
having larger tables to place the computers, among
others.
In general, most of the comments about the
flipped model were positive. They saw that the
method offers more possibilities that the traditional
one. With the inclusion of technology, students felt
more confident when using in-class and out the
class. Students from group C and D answered
whether pre-recorded lectures helped them in their
learning process. In group C, 99.68% answer
affirmatively; while in group D, all students
responded the same. The comment of the only
student who did not think the pre-recorded lectures
helped him was that videos had the same
information than the book, while others, considered
it as an advantage, as seen in the previous
comments.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this article was to evaluate the
effectiveness of the flipped classroom method in the
subject Pavements. After analysing the results, some
conclusions can be raised:
The flipped classroom had a negative impact on
student’s final grades, given by the lower values
than those obtained by the traditional model.
However, results might not be conclusive, as
students in this group (A and B) could have
performed better without regards of the learning
methods. So, this is an extrinsic aspect one should
keep in mind.
Despite the low final scores grades, student's
opinion about the flipped classroom model was
positive. Most students in the flipped classroom did
not want to change the implemented method, which
means they were satisfied with the model. Their
comments in the open questions widely confirmed
this.
The flipped classroom model promotes active
self-learning, better than does the traditional model.
In spite that students asked the instructor to solve
and explain an example problem before the students
try to solve their own; students learn by doing it.
This skill is a competence that future professionals
should learn to get a better result in the field work.
Also, pre-recorded lectures help to cover a wide
range of learning styles, since students learn in
different ways and speed. For all these good aspects,
this method, without consideration of the grades, is
better than the traditional one. Furthermore, it is
congruous with the developing countries educational
system, because they are starting to make more
efforts to deliver better education.
This study has a number of limitations. First,
groups were not homogenous since they performed
differently in the second part of the semester. Also,
students could forward the pre-recorded lecture,
since this is on the learner’s control. Furthermore, it
performed the study in one university with a small
sample size.
Despite these limitations, this study extends the
knowledge of application the flipped classroom
model in Pavements course. It showed that the
model is accepted positively by students. Also, the
model promotes self-learning and reinforces the idea
that in the class, students have broad learning styles.
2ETI 2019 - Special Session on E-Learning and Educational Technological Innovation
514

The method focuses more on learning activities than
on the grading tasks. In short, the method
significantly improves the learning experience.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author acknowledges the support of the National
Secretariat of Higher Education, Science,
Technology and Innovation (SENESCYT) and
Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja from the
Republic of Ecuador.
REFERENCES
Bates, S., & Galloway, R. (2012). The inverted classroom
in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a
case study. In Higher Education Academy STEM
Conference. London - United Kingdom.
Enfield, J. (2013). Looking at the Impact of the Flipped
Classroom Model of Instruction on Undergraduate
Multimedia Students at CSUN. TechTrends, 57(6),
14–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0698-1
Fredericks, C., Rayyan, S., Teodorescu, R., Balint, T.,
Seaton, D., & Pritchard, D. E. (2013). From flipped to
open instruction: The mechanics online course. In
Sixth Conference of MIT’s Learning International
Network Consortium.
García-Ramírez, Y. (2018). Uso del modelo de clase
invertida en la asignatura de Estática en Ingeniería
Civil. Ventana Informática, 38(enero-julio), 65–82.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30554/ventanainform.
38.2860.2018
Gardner, A., Willey, K., Vessalas, K., & Li, J. (2014).
Experiences with flipped learning in subjects in
consecutive stages of a Civil Engineering programme.
In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the
Australasian Association for Engineering Education.
School of Engineering & Advanced Technology,
Massey University. Retrieved from
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/31875
Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Yao, S., Tarmo, P., & Jahren, C.
(2016). A Flipped Classroom Approach to Teaching
Transportation Engineering. In ASSE’s 123rd Annual -
Conference and exposition. New Orleans, LA.
Le, T. Q., & Do, T. T. A. (2019). Active Teaching
Techniques for Engineering Students to Ensure The
Learning Outcomes of Training Programs by CDIO
Approach. International Journal on Advanced
Science, Engineering and Information Technology
(Vol. 9). INSIGHT.
Lee, S. L., Hackett, & Estrada, H. (2015). Evaluation of a
Flipped Classroom in Mechanics of Materials. In
122nd ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.
Seattle.
Li, Y., & Daher, T. (2017). Integrating Innovative
Classroom Activities with Flipped Teaching in a
Water Resources Engineering Class. Journal of
Professional Issues in Engineering Education and
Practice, 143(1), 05016008.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000297
Milman, N. B. (2012). The Flipped Classroom Strategy:
What is it and how can it be used? Distance Learning,
11(4), 9–11.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The
flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage
millennial students through active learning strategies.
Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44–
49.
https://doi.org/doi.org.proxy2.lib.umanitoba.ca/10.1
SENPLADES. (2017). Plan Nacional para el Buen Vivir
2017-2021, Planificamos para toda una vida. Quito.
Sohrabi, B., & Iraj, H. (2016). Implementing flipped
classroom using digital media: A comparison of two
demographically different groups perceptions.
Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 514–524.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.056
State College. (2005). Minitab 14.2 Statistical Software
[Computer program]. PA: Minitab, Inc. Retrieved
from www.minitab.com
Subramanian, D. V., & Kelly, P. (2019). Effects of
introducing innovative teaching methods in
engineering classes: A case study on classes in an
Indian university. Computer Applications in
Engineering Education, 27(1), 183–193.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22067
UN. (2015). About the Sustainable Development Goals.
Retrieved April 30, 2019, from
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainabl
e-development-goals/
APPENDIX
Showing up next some comments made by the
students regarding the changes in the course of
pavements with the flipped classroom model:
 The subject was well-performed, except in some
evaluations details. In general, for me is
excellent how it was carried out. Also, its
methodology was very educational that archives
the learning.
 The classes were very educational. I think it is a
remarkable learning method to use inside the
classroom by reviewing the topics in advance. It
can cover the knowledge gaps with the instructor
and performing examples applied to our
environment.
 I think the applied methodology was
satisfactory. Videos were very helpful because
we could go back to them quickly when doubt
came out.
 I think the method is good because it requires
the student to review the material in a proper
Pavements Course: Is the Flipped Classroom Model Effective in All Cases? A Case Study in a Developing Country
515

way. Sometimes it becomes a bit tired and
repetitive, but it seems a good way to learn.
 The videos were extremely helpful because, with
previous knowledge, it could do more examples
in-class. It used the classroom at 100 percent.
 It was an interesting and dynamic course, where
you learn a lot, and you learn well. The
instructor shows mastery of the subject, besides
being understanding and making yourself
understood very well. I would give a 10/10 to
the method that was being used to teach this
course.
 The subject is really important. The instructor
showed a complete mastery of the subject,
knowing how to meet all expectations in the
pavement course. But the exams and tests were
a bit complex.
 My experience was positive because the classes
are more dynamic. The use of computer in-class
promotes learning and speed to perform the
academic tasks.
 The method is very satisfactory since the flipped
classroom model allows us to delve more into
the subjects, before the class explanation.
 It is a useful method because it allows us to be
more aware of the subject. We need to pay more
attention due to the evaluation is continuous.
 I would have liked to attend weekly tutoring;
however, my schedule did not allow it. It would
be nice to have other schedules options.
 Despite the broad content of the course, the
teaching method was ideal, because more
knowledge of the subject was acquired.
Showing up next some comments made by the
students about the pre-recorded lectures:
 The implementation of videos for teaching
seemed a good idea. In my case, it promoted
concentration.
 Videos are a quick and comfortable way to
review the content to any doubt, in addition to
self-feeding knowledge before class, and
minimize time to take advantage of solving
problems in-class.
 Pre-recorded lectures help me a lot because I
do not enjoy reading. When I watch the video, it
is much easier to understand the subject.
 Well, we could review them if we had any
doubts. Videos explained issues that in the
books is very difficult to understand.
 They helped me to prepare for the reading
controls and my studies. When I had any doubts,
I only played the video as many times as
necessary until I understood the class.
 Videos helped to have a clear idea about the
content in the next class, always ahead of what
we are going to see. If something in-class was
not clear or we could not attend the class; we
may go to the videos to review them and resolve
those doubts.
 They helped to have shorter study times, and the
teaching is given faster and in a better way.
 They made learning more didactic because the
book has too much theory. Learning from video
is much better. Videos are complementary
material; you can watch them, in the case that
you see a new term in the book.
 They are more focus on the practical life, taking
into account events that can be carried out in
situ, that in-class, on many occasions; they are
not taken into account.
2ETI 2019 - Special Session on E-Learning and Educational Technological Innovation
516