ISBN 978-1-7281-8662-7 Editado por ICACIT ©ICACIT, 2020 6th Symposium ICACIT 2020 - International Symposium on Accreditation of Engineering and Computing Education, has been organized by ICACIT. Organizing Committee Conference Chair: Jimmy Túllume Salazar Technical Program Chair: José Durán Talledo Scientific Committee: 1. Gabriel Añazco (Chile) 2. Diego Hernando (Colombia) 3. Eduardo Bezerra (Brasil) 4. Alejandra Acuña Villalobos (Chile) 5. John Long. (Australia) 6. Cristian Bornhardt (Chile) 7. Jonathan Weaver (USA) 8. Luiz Ricardo Begosso (USA) 9. Rafael Mellado-Silva (Chile) 10. Jonathan Alvarez Arizs (Colombia) 11. Nelson Piedra (Ecuador) 12. Alba Pérez (Ecuador) 13. Carlos Eugenio Martínez-Cruz (El Salvador) 14. Luis Serpa-Andrade (Ecuador) 15. Roger Hadgrafz (Australia) 16. Juan Pablo Cardona Guio (Colombia) 17. Joberto Martins Salvador University (Brasil) 18. German Ramos (Colombia) 19. José Antonio Pow-Sang (Perú) 20. Jorge Abad (Ecuador) 21. Oscar J. Suarez (México) 22. Janneth Chicaiza (Ecuador) 23. Luis Barrera (Perú) 24. Sandra Milena Merchan Rubiano (Colombia) 25. Teofilo Ramos (México) 26. Francisco Moo-Mena (México) 27. Solomon Sunday (Finlandia) 28. Jesus Gabalán Coello (Colombia) 29. Tomislav Jagušt (Croacia) 30. Maria Hallo (Ecuador) 31. Alfredo Soeiro (Portugal) 32. Diana Francisca Adamatti (Brasil) 33. Gregory Lucenko (Ucranía) 34. Divya Nalla Nalla Malla (India) 35. Gabriela Carrillo (Ecuador) 36. María Isabel Pozzo (Argentina) 37. Claudio Andres Catalán Huenchur (Chile) 38. Ana Liz Souto Oliveira de Araújo (Brasil) 39. Anastassis Kozanitis (Canada) 40. Felipe Muñoz Pontificia (Chile) 41. Eduardo Rodríguez Araque (Colombia) 42. Nuria Llobregat-Gomez (España) 43. Eduardo Torres (México) 44. José Carlos Quadrado (Portugal) 45. Christian Diaz (Chile) 46. Marìa Felipa Cañas Cano (Perú) 47. Abdelmalek Halawani (Palestina) 48. Wim Van Petegem (Bélgica) 49. Marco Winzker (Dinamarca) 50. Cristian Castro (Chile) 51. Maria Teresa Garibay (Argentina) 52. Alexander Mikroyannidis (Reino Unido) 53. Orlando Lopez-Cruz (Colombia) 54. Marcin Fojcik (Noruega) 55. Anne-Marie Jolly (Francia) 56. Vicente Ferreira De Lucena Jr (Brasil) 57. Chandrabhan Sharma (Jamaica) 58. Adriana Paez Pino (Colombia) 59. Christina Andersson (Alemanía) 60. Michael Oudshoorn (USA) 61. Una Beagon (Irlanda) 62. Francisco Fialho (Brasil) 63. Rajendra Raj (USA) 64. Mario Chauca (Perú) 65. George Magoulas (Reino Unido) 66. Abdallah Al-Zoubi (Jordania) 67. Andre Luiz Przybysz (Brasil) 68. Peter Tase (USA) 69. Paola Ordoñez (Colombia) 70. Barend Botha (Sudafrica) 71. Paulo S Lopes De Souza (Brasil) 72. Yovanny Vela Saenz (Colombia) 73. Anna Friesel (Dinamarca) 74. Jimmy Túllume Salazar (Perú) 75. José Durán Talledo (Perú) Topic Symposium ICACIT 2020 1. Quality Assurance and Accreditation: - National and international program accreditation: experiences, implementation, models and multi-models. - Assessment, evaluation and continuous improvement: experiences, implementation, models and multi-models. - Models of quality assurance, accreditation, licensing and multi-models. - Curriculum design (curriculum and course abstract) aligned with student outcomes or competencies. - Inclusion of collaborative or student-centered learning techniques at the program level. - Educational policies. 2. Teaching and Learning in Engineering and Computing Education - Final and intermediate integrating projects. - Engineering major design. - Student outcomes. - Teaching focused on meaningful learning. - Assessment of learning, student outcomes, competencies. - Applied technology and virtual or augmented reality environments. - Learning in unidisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary contexts. - Inclusion of collaborative or student-centered learning techniques in the classroom. - Curricular development. - Student-centered teaching methods. - Transdisciplinary learning. 3. Students and Professors’ Relationship with Industry, Government, Society and Academy. - Student outcomes: definition, evaluation, monitoring of graduates. - University social responsibility (USR): USR projects, cooperation, articulation, R+D+I applied to the USR. - University-Industry Link: projects, cooperation, articulation, R+D+I. - University-Academy link: joint R+D+I projects, student/professor exchange/stays, cooperation, articulation, R+D+I. - University-Government link: joint R+D+I projects, professor/student internships, cooperation, cooperation in the legal framework. - Student outcomes and their relationship with the recruitment and selection of workforce. - Linking with graduates: challenges and benefits. 4. Students, Professors and Associated Services. - Characterization of new entrants and students: experiences and studies on behavior. - Characterization of teachers and pedagogical and specialty training plan. - Migration of students from / to other programs. - Tutoring and the like: proposals and experiences. - Professional and pre-professional practices in relation to Student Results / Competencies. 5. Equity, Diversity & Inclusion: - Gender in Engineering Education. - Social Justice. - Recruitment and selection. Evaluation of Grouped Flipped Classrooms Compared with Three-Year Actual Classes Using a Questionnaire Katsuyuki Umezawa Takashi Ishida Department of Information Science Fuculty of Economics Shonan Institute of Technology Takasaki City University of Economics Kanagawa Japan Gunma, Japan [email protected] [email protected] Makoto Nakazawa Shigeichi Hirasawa Department of Industrial Information Science Research Institute for Science and Engineering Junior College of Aizu Waseda University Fukushima, Japan Tokyo, Japan [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—The concept of flipped classroom, in which face-to- statistical evaluation. Section V concludes this study with an face lessons are conducted in school after studying at home, is overall summary and introduction to our future work. gaining interest. We proposed the “grouped flipped-classroom” approach, which divides students in a face-to-face class into II. RELATED WORK three groups based on time and their degree of comprehension of learning at home. We applied the grouped flipped-classroom Bergmann and Sams proposed the flipped-classroom ap- concept to actual classes at the Shonan Institute of Technology, proach [3] [4], demonstrating that student success rate in- Kanagawa, Japan, for three years between 2017 and 2019. The creased and failure rate decreased. Tune et al. showed that the number of students who took classes was 183 in 2017, 189 in exam scores owing to the flipped-classroom approach classes 2018, and 224 in 2019. In this study, we analyzed the findings of a questionnaire. From the results, it becomes clear that there were higher than those owing to conventional lecture-type is a correlation between those who dislike grouping and those classes [5]. Furthermore, Chin reported that “the effect” and who feel that the learning content of lesson is challenging, and “sense of participation” in classes improved when students students with low understanding dislike grouping. looked back on their learning experience [6]. Index Terms—Flipped Classroom, e-Learning, Blended Learn- ing, Effective Classroom III. APPLICATION TO AN ACTUAL CLASS A. Explanation of class I. INTRODUCTION We applied our grouped flipped-classroom method to the In conventional classes, teachers first give knowledge to “Basic programming practice” class held at the Shonan In- students in a school, and then the students do their homework stitute of Technology from late 2017 to 2019. The number to increase their knowledge, at home. Whereas, in a flipped of students who took classes was 183 in 2017, 189 in 2018, classroom, knowledge acquisition (self-study) is completed us- and 224 in 2019. There were two 90 min classes per day. ing digital teaching materials at home, before a class at school, The content of the lessons covered the basics of the Java and knowledge confirmation and problem-based learning are programming language. performed in the classroom [1]. We proposed the “grouped flipped-classroom” approach as the more efficient alternative B. General explanation of flipped classroom to conventional flipped classrooms. At the Shonan Institute The contents of the classes include the Java programming of Technology, Kanagawa, Japan, we applied this concept language (Input/Output, Variable/Arithmetic, Branch, Repeti- to actual classes. We evaluated the collected questionnaire tion, Array, Method, Class I, Class II). They were implemented results [2]. In this study, we analyzed the questionnaire results as an eight-week flipped-classroom approach, as shown in collected when our proposed method was applied to our actual Fig.1. classes for three years between 2017 and 2019. In Section II, we describe the patterns of a flipped classroom C. Grouped flipped classroom for one week as conventional research. Section III describes details of an Every week, the classes proceed as follows: First, students actual class such as subject information and class composi- learn at home using the browsing history visualization system tion. Section IV presents the questionnaire results and their [7] before face-to-face classes. Through this system, it is 978-1-7281-7118-0/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE Q1. Please choose your comprehension of group lessons. A1. My understanding has deepened by dividing students into groups. A2. If I had to say, my understanding has deepened by dividing students into groups. A3. Grouping has not affected my understanding. A4. If I had