thesis flipped learning

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 20 July 2021

Effectiveness of the flipped classroom model on students’ self-reported motivation and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

• José María Campillo-Ferrer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8570-3749 1   na1 &
• Pedro Miralles-Martínez   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9143-2145 1   na1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  8 , Article number:  176 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

29k Accesses

51 Citations

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study investigates the effects of the flipped classroom on Education students’ perceptions of their learning and motivation during the current pandemic. The sample consisted of 179 student teachers from the Faculty of Education of the University of Murcia in the academic year 2020–2021, in which the flipped classroom model was implemented. Identical surveys were administered and examined through both descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. Statistically significant differences were found between pre-tests and post-tests with experienced students scoring higher on average in the latter. Most students had a positive perception about the flipped classroom, noting the advantage of practical in-class activities, as well as increased self-autonomy in learning.

Similar content being viewed by others

Content validity of the Constructivist Learning in Higher Education Settings (CLHES) scale in the context of the flipped classroom in higher education

Research on flipped classrooms in foreign language teaching in Chinese higher education

The implementation of a flipped classroom approach at a UK dental school

Introduction.

The increasing development of digital technologies and their application in education facilitates new learning ecologies that offer students new web-based learning opportunities and resources. This rapid spread of interactive technologies has facilitated the adoption of innovative approaches in higher education that help to promote collaborative learning, exploration, and research in online networked learning environments. It is in this context that alternative approaches to teacher-centered instruction have arisen and made a breakthrough in tertiary education.

In this line, the development of innovative student-centered approaches has encouraged teachers to rethink educational processes to shift the focus from them to the students, facilitate student participation, develop practical thinking, and improve digital skills (Wright, 2011 ).

Technology-driven models, such as the flipped classroom (FC), which provides students with direct access to video lectures, slides, and other teaching resources on online educational platforms, have gradually gained visibility and relevance (Bergmann and Sams, 2012 ). This discussion-oriented approach has accelerated well-structured independent learning, allowing teachers to provide feedback and assistance through innovative resources and learning management systems (LMS) in parallel with the implementation of collaborative problem-solving activities and group discussions in face-to-face lessons (López et al., 2016 ).

This is even more true at the present time due to the extreme circumstances. Undoubtedly, these technology-based approaches have become a greater priority during the COVID-19 pandemic as a consequence of the great disruption the virus is causing. In particular, the increasing restrictions recommended by the World Health Organization and other international institutions on disease control and prevention are profoundly affecting the ways in which we interact with each other, and the methods by which teachers teach and students learn and work (World Health Organization, 2020 ). Obviously, this completely changes the educational landscape, which includes not only teaching modes but also individual and collective practices on how to proceed (Dhawan, 2020 ; Fatani, 2020 ). This is particularly relevant for tertiary institutions such as universities or colleges, where a wide variety of classroom components, namely lectures, tutorials, or workshops, are being adapted to the global pandemic (Naw, 2020 ). In planning for the 2020-21 academic year, it was critical to consider certain constraints due to the evolution of the pandemic that has involved measures such as limiting classroom capacity and reducing face-to-face interactions. The restrictions introduced have even led to the suspension of classes and workshops in certain faculties or for specific groups of university students at some point during 2020 and 2021.

Regardless of the challenges, it is imperative that university programs continue to provide effective educational services (Tang et al., 2020 ). For this reason, a wide variety of mechanisms have been put in place to ensure that teaching is carried out on a regular basis. Academics in all areas of study have re-examined their teaching resources and found new options for engaging students in light of the current crisis. In these unfavorable conditions, innovative approaches based on distance conferencing technology and online tools play an important role at this time of great tension (Villa et al., 2020 ).

Several recent research papers have examined the intrinsic and extrinsic results of these teaching innovations, finding that these approaches can foster learning either in fully online or blended academic environments, even when it is mandatory to shift from one mode to another because of the present pandemic circumstances. Chick et al. ( 2020 ) offer several solutions to mitigate the risk of virus spread, including the FC model, teleconferencing, and online practice, with positive outcomes, as participants were satisfied with the format and were interested in continuing to learn without regularly attending face-to-face lectures. Comparative research was conducted by Latorre-Cosculluela et al. ( 2021 ), who concluded that participants were inclined to take a more active role in their own learning process by developing 21st-century skills (e.g., critical thinking or creativity) under the FC model rather than passively listening to direct instruction. In this regard, other studies highlighted the relevance of videos, recorded lectures, and group discussions, among other digital resources, to foster discussions, stimulate student learning and divert attention away from the current disruption caused by the pandemic (Agarwal and Kaushik, 2020 ; Guraya, 2020 ). As can be noted from the above-mentioned studies, the importance of increasing satisfaction and engagement during the unusual situation of COVID-19 is fundamental for educators to adopt strategic decisions to develop a culture of engagement among students. In this sense, Collado-Valero et al. ( 2021 ) identified a significant increase in the use of different online digital resources under the FC approach in a Spanish higher education context, mainly those related to video and audio resources, which provided a greater number of opportunities for students to share their learning experiences through a virtual space. Other research studies also confirm the distinctive rise of flipped learning, whereby students access information and have more opportunities to interact with each other, due to the wide range of possibilities for sharing opinions and ideas offered by these virtual scenarios. In particular, Colomo-Magaña et al. ( 2020 ) surveyed 123 trainee teachers who had been learning under the flipped-top classroom model during the 19/20 academic year. They concluded that the application of this flexible methodology promoted the development of oral skills and the improvement of learning abilities. They also highlighted time optimization as one of the benefits indicated by the participants in the survey. With the same purpose of contributing to the promotion of student learning achievement and engagement despite pandemic constraints, Smith and Boscak ( 2021 ) examined standard flipped classroom pedagogy, in which students were provided with self-learning educational resources, e.g., pre-class videos or case studies, together with interactive online lectures in which learning topics were revisited and discussed. They noted both the students’ satisfaction with the approach invested by the flexible and engaging material used and their subsequent confidence in the skills developed during the course. In parallel, Monzonís et al. ( 2020 ) examined the perceptions of pedagogy students who followed a flipped methodology during the COVID-19 crisis and found that most of them had improved their digital skills and increased their motivation thanks to this methodology. Despite these clear benefits for skills development and active participation of students, there are still some challenges that need to be addressed in more detail and that may be mainly related to teachers, students, or technological requirements. Authors such as Agung et al. ( 2020 ) highlighted some technology-based problems when they found that most students surveyed were not enthusiastic about online learning mainly due to lack of access to the internet and other technological resources, which may be revealing the problem of the digital divide. The abrupt shift towards e-learning since spring 2020 has had other tangible web-based limits, which have been indicated by similar studies, namely over-reliance on the proper functioning of technology or lack of personal contact in video conferences due to the marked contrast caused by the teaching-learning environment switch (Goksu and Duran, 2020 , Clark-Wilson et al., 2020 ). The challenges related to teachers may be related to their difficulties in dealing with emerging technology in such a short space of time. In this regard, ElSaheli-Elhage ( 2021 ) noted that some educators admitted that they are not digitally literate enough to cope with regular online teaching activities during the pandemic. In this respect, Cevikbas and Kaiser ( 2020 ) pointed out another drawback related to digital teaching, which is closely linked to the subject-specific content needed for effective flipped teaching. They highlighted the problems for teachers in identifying adapted learning materials that successfully meet the specific needs of their students or in creating their own lecture videos, slides, infographics, and other learning resources via online platforms. Regarding student-related challenges during the current crisis, some authors have identified students’ depressive symptoms and that signs of anxiety soar in online learning programs due to the perception of lagging behind academically under these unusual conditions (Islam et al., 2020 ). The influence of physical distance or the increase in response time when answering queries and providing academic assistance in asynchronous lessons may be other factors that cause these feelings of psychological unease (Ardan et al., 2020 ).

Therefore, further research and reflection are needed on the application of these innovative models and strategies in these new learning scenarios to improve understanding and adjust these web-based approaches according to the increasing and progressive demands and needs of the learners.

The aim of this research is to analyze the effect that the FC model had on the students’ perceptions of their learning process and progress and their levels of motivation. To achieve this aim, the following research objectives were defined:

RO1: To examine students’ views on the effects that the FC model had on their motivation levels at the beginning and end of the core unit during the pandemic period, and in particular:

To analyze their opinions on the impact this model had, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used on their level of motivation according to the gender of the participants.

To examine their impressions of the effects of this model, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used on their level of motivation according to their experience under this approach.

To analyze their impressions of the effects this model had, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used on their level of motivation according to their level of digital competence under this approach.

RO2: To analyze their impressions of the learning achieved under a flipped methodology at the beginning and end of the core unit during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular:

To examine their impressions of the learning developed, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used in the core unit according to the gender of the participants.

To analyze their impressions of the learning developed, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used in the core unit according to their experience under this approach.

To analyze their perspectives on the learning developed, as well as the variety of techniques and strategies used in the core unit according to their level of digital competence under this approach.

A quasi-experimental design was adopted through pre-test and post-test questionnaires, which were prepared ad hoc to measure the extent to which the objectives set out in this research had been achieved.

A quantitative methodology was applied to examine university students’ perceptions of their learning process within this flipped model. Following the design of the pre-test and post-test, identical assessment measures were provided to participants before and after they had learned with this blended learning approach, to analyze comparative data, focusing on significant differences in learning perceptions at the end of the term.

Participants

The flipped experience was implemented in four groups in the core unit of Didactics of Social Sciences, which is compulsory for all second-year students of the Primary Education degree of the University of Murcia, Spain. In the study, the sample comprised 179 student teachers whose ages ranged from 19 to 39 years ( M  = 20.02 and SD = 3.32). Most of the participants were women, (43 men (24.02%) and 136 women (75.98%), and only one of them had repeated the year (0.56%). Informed consent was obtained from all participants to conduct this study.

The main objective of the core unit was for students to acquire relevant knowledge and mastery of the skills required to be effective social science teachers, with emphasis on cultivating meaningful learning and using accessible resources to encourage reflection on their own learning process.

Correspondingly, students had to plan, carry out and evaluate innovative proposals for the teaching of social science contents together with a rationale for the approach selected and a detailed description of how to assess this content in Primary Education.

The strategies used in the flipped approach were based on the learning management system as an effective technology that can support learning and make it trackable and motivating.

The core unit was taught for four months in the first term of the 2020/2021 academic year (September-December) using a blended teaching model that combined classroom experiences and online course delivery in both synchronous and asynchronous classes sessions.

Synchronous class sessions were held on Fridays using the Zoom video conferencing platform, in which students were asked to watch videos, visit educational sites or search for information on current social science issues. Each week, students were provided with a Zoom link that they could use by logging in beforehand with their university credentials, thus ensuring the most secure access to online learning. The instantaneous sharing capability of this type of video conferencing allowed educators to work on course content through real-time presentations or to record and store them on the e-learning campus, so making them available to students throughout the term.

Asynchronous learning was promoted using innovative and interactive learning materials such as prerecorded video lectures or multimedia activities. The contents were regularly uploaded after finishing the preceding teaching units. Despite the flexibility of time frames, students had weekly deadlines to access the previously uploaded content and they had to log into their accounts on the learning platform and check what they were regularly assigned via hyperlinks.

In-class sessions were held on Wednesdays and encompassed a wide variety of practical tasks aimed at promoting numerous and various interactions in which students cooperated together and accomplished shared goals to demonstrate competence in simulated skills practice. Groups were divided into three subgroups to avoid risks and maximize students’ learning.

Subsequently, groups of university students were monitored until they finished the term, and information on their perceptions of the flipped experience was collected before and after applying this methodological proposal to gauge the impact of this program at the end of the period.

Data collection tools

Participants’ views on the adoption of this flipped approach were collected through an ad hoc questionnaire, the main purpose of which is to report on the implementation of a flipped approach by collecting data at two points in time from a sample of university students. Several advantages have been identified in the use of this technique in terms of reliability, objectivity, and representativeness (Cohen et al., 2017 ). Questionnaires are particularly valuable for data collection, as their quantifying nature and easy administration allow researchers to collect information from a large number of people. They are also considered quite reliable, as researchers do not need to be present when respondents fill it out, which means that if administered by different researchers, they should provide similar results. However, some limitations have been observed due to their impersonal nature, given the researcher’s detachment, or differences in interpretation that may distort respondents’ answers and undermine the validity of the information provided (Beiske, 2002 ; Waidi, 2016 ). The questionnaire was composed of thirty-six items divided into four main sections: self-perceived motivation, self-perceived acquisition of digital competencies, the effectiveness of this approach on students’ learning processes, and reported views on students’ learning of democratic education. The items were rated on a Likert scale of one to five points, where one is “very poor” and five is “excellent”, to value the degree of respondents’ agreement with the statements presented.

Procedure and data analysis

The data collected during the research were analyzed in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.26.0. The degree of reliability and validity of the instrument was estimated prior to data analysis. The construct reliability was determined using Cronbach’s Alpha to estimate whether the instrument consisting of a multiple-question Likert scale was reliable. A Cronbach’s Alpha value equal to or higher than .70, which shows good internal consistency, is generally accepted in most social science research studies (González Alonso and Pazmiño Santacruz, 2015 ; Quansah, 2017 ). Regarding the questionnaire, positive results were obtained both overall ( α  = 0.89) and in each of the sections: motivation, α  = 0.86; learning processes, α  = 0.83. The validity of the instrument was also tested using Bartlett’s test of sphericity and a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for each section of the questionnaire. In all the sections a significance level of 0.000 in Bartlett’s test of sphericity was achieved. After running the PCA, we obtained distribution in the first block of 2 dimensions, explaining 58,47% of the total variance, with a KMO of 0.906. In the second block, we obtained 2 dimensions, explaining 53.24%, with a KMO of 0.861.

As for the first objective, Table 1 shows descriptive statistics, consisting of two categories of measures: measures of central tendency (mean) and measures of variability (standard deviation).

In general, male students’ extrinsic motivation is higher than intrinsic motivation, while female students scored similarly on both types of self-perceived motivation. When contrasting the results between the pre-tests and post-tests, it is observed that male students scored higher in the post-tests with respect to their intrinsic self-perceived motivation, while female students scored lower in the post-tests for both types of self-perceived motivation. No significant differences were identified between pretests and posttests in this section.

As we can see in Table 2 , participants with previous experience with the FC model indicated higher self-perceived motivation than those with no experience. Also, student teachers with a high level of digital competence were more motivated to excel in class than those with a lower competence level. However, students with a lower level of digital competence showed more self-perceived intrinsic motivation to improve their future teaching practice than the other subgroups. Non-parametric tests were conducted to examine whether participants’ perceptions of their self-perceived motivation in relation to Flipped-Classroom-based learning differed statistically. Wilcoxon tests showed no significant differences between pre-tests and post-tests. However, Mann–Whitney U tests revealed significant differences between participants with prior experience in this approach and those without, with the former feeling more motivated than the latter to learn new active methodologies, link them to their future teaching practice, improve their autonomy or interact socially more effectively.

As shown in Table 3 , female students were more motivated by the resources and strategies implemented in the core unit compared to male students. Mann–Whitney U tests revealed significant differences between males and females in relation to small group activities, with female students rating this item significantly higher than the other subgroup.

Most of the items have a median between 3 and 4, which means that with these scores the participants indicated sufficient self-perceived motivation for this approach. The group with the lowest e-competence is the only group that gives a similar or higher score on all items in the post-test compared to the scores of the pre-test and the other groups (Table 4 ).

Regarding the second objective, the results in Table 5 show descriptive statistics, consisting of two categories of measures: measures of central tendency (mean) and measures of variability (standard deviation), as well as non-parametric results according to the gender of the participants.

With respect to the second objective, results indicate positive perceptions of their learning processes both before and after the implementation of this approach. However, male students scored lower in pre-tests but higher in posttests, particularly, with respect to learning interactions and self-evaluation. No significant differences were found between males and females in this objective.

As we can see in Table 6 , participants with no prior experience assigned a lower score to the items related to planning, managing, and assessing processes. In fact, non-parametric tests revealed significant differences in these items between respondents with and without experience with this approach. No significant differences were found between subgroups with different levels of e-competence.

The table below indicates men’s and women’s perceptions of the learning strategies and resources used (Table 7 ).

The results indicate that both men’s and women’s views on their learning are lower in the post-tests, although male students rated the quizzes, points, prizes, and the student portal more positively after the core unit. No significant differences were identified between the two subgroups.

In terms of their participation and involvement in the strategies presented to support their learning in the core unit, respondents rated practical classroom activities, small group work, quizzes, and rewards higher than the other options, with medians around 4 or higher. Significant differences were identified between the subgroups with and without prior experience, with the former rating videos, practical activities, quizzes, and small group tasks significantly higher than the latter. Similar differences were found between subgroups with different levels of e-proficiency, with students with higher e-proficiency scoring higher on the small group activities and computer tools.

Discussion and conclusions

This article examines student teachers’ self-perceived motivation and learning under the FC model during the pandemic in the academic year 20/21. The data obtained in this study showed a positive evaluation of the approach, both in reported motivation and perception of learning.

According to the results, participants felt sufficiently motivated both intrinsically and extrinsically, throughout the core unit, to learn new active methodologies and to improve their future teaching practice. Thus, this new and unexpected situation did not especially affect their interest in the FC model, and they were willing to participate and collaborate to do better in the future. As the comparative research shows (Latorre-Cosculluela et al., 2021 ), respondents were more willing to actively participate in the FC model than to be passive recipients of the information.

In addition, as other studies show (Aşıksoy and Özdamlı, 2016 ; Wanner and Palmer, 2015 ), the impressions expressed by respondents on the relevance of various strategies and techniques on their self-perceived motivation were quite good, with the Kahoot! quizzes being one of the best-valued resources. In this sense, it should be noted that the effectiveness of gamification and some related ludic elements such as points, levels, or prizes can provide fun and interaction, and thus increase motivation and promote student participation. Furthermore, as Fontana ( 2020 ) and Park and Kim ( 2021 ) point out, gamification can enhance social relationships through which students can share information, learn from each other and entertain themselves through these online platforms, which are even more significant during the pandemic period associated with social distancing and the need to protect oneself and others. Notwithstanding, as suggested by Mekler et al. ( 2017 ) the underlying motivational mechanisms should be the subject of further empirical research.

Regarding student teachers’ perceptions of their own learning, the data show their positive impressions, which are in line with other studies on the implementation of this approach (Foldness, 2016 ; Love et al., 2014 ). It seems obvious that participants were interested in understanding effective methodological shifts that support more flexible and active ways of learning under the current pandemic situation. According to the data, students’ attitudes towards flipped education, which has shifted from prioritizing traditional lecture-based lessons to more student-centered and autonomous learning methods, were receptive to this technology-based active learning approach. Students valued most positively the use of a wider range of online resources, the development of more frequent interactions, not only teacher-student but also peer-to-peer, and new ways of managing knowledge and content. Other research studies also agreed on the appropriateness of these alternative approaches during coronavirus disease because of their great deal of flexibility, their free access to online academic resources, and their interactive learning environments, among other reasons (Chick et al., 2020 ; Lapitan et al., 2021 ). In this sense, the use of a full set of IT tools, such as a modern LMS with a user-friendly interface and effective collaboration tools, would allow for flexible resource management, which favors the search, sharing, and application of knowledge among students (Basilaia and Kvavadze, 2020 ; Zainuddin and Perera, 2018 ).

It is worth highlighting the statistically significant differences identified in the dimensions of the study, especially regarding previous experience and e-competence. In the first case, students with prior experience valued the effects of this approach in improving their future teaching practice more highly than the rest of their peers, which means that they saw this innovation as an opportunity to explore, expand their knowledge and update their potential as future teachers significantly more than those without prior experience. Therefore, these results encourage the further implementation of these actions, task-based initiatives in higher education, so that students can gain more experience of what an FC model consists of and thus improve their motivation and learn to manage cognitive knowledge more effectively (Abeysekera and Dawson, 2015 ).

Regarding the e-competence variable, results from non-parametric tests showed that students with a higher level of e-competence perceived active in-class tasks as more intrinsically motivating than the rest of their peers, while students with a lower e-competence found that taking an FC approach constituted a more motivating means of improving their future teaching practice. These different perceptions may give learners a more immediate sense of progress if they are sufficiently e-competent within this model or in the future once they intensify their acquisition of digital skills. In any case, the FC model has proved that it enables students to easily understand their progression in the learning and development of innovative methodological proposals (Blau and Shamir-Inbal, 2017 ).

However, despite the students’ positive opinions, their impressions are not as optimistic as in other similar pre-pandemic studies conducted in the same context. The results in research conducted a year earlier (Gómez-Carrasco et al., 2020 ), in which students expressed more significant positive views on their self-perceived motivation, one point higher on average, may demonstrate that the consequences of pandemic-related restrictions are causing some unease among university students.

Furthermore, the findings of this research cannot be representative of current teaching and learning processes that drive student motivation, as the results are drawn from a single experience and it would be advisable for the analysis to be compared with actual learning outcomes and in more core units to gain a more complete understanding of the current outcomes and impacts of this model.

Therefore, there is a need for further study of these newly emerging e-learning scenarios due to the restrictions or lockdowns, as well as the complex set of interrelated factors affecting their implementation. In addition, further research is required to analyze the lower value items within this approach to customize them according to learners’ specific interests and needs.

Data availability

The datasets generated during this study are not publicly available because the identities of some participants are visible, undermining privacy protection, but they are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abeysekera L, Dawson P (2015) Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. High Educ Res Dev 34(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336

Article   Google Scholar  

Agarwal S, Kaushik JS (2020) Student’s perception of online learning during COVID pandemic. Indian J Pediatr 87:554–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-020-03327-7

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Agung ASN, Surtikanti MW, Quinones CA (2020) Students’ perception of online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: a case study on the english students of STKIP Pamane Talino. SOSHUM 10(2):225–235. https://doi.org/10.31940/soshum.v10i2.1316

Ardan M, Rahman FF, Geroda GB (2020) The influence of physical distance to student anxiety on COVID-19, Indonesia. J Crit Rev 7(17):1126–1132

Google Scholar  

Aşıksoy G, Özdamlı F (2016) Flipped classroom adapted to the ARCS model of motivation and applied to a physics course. Eurasia J Math Sci 12(6):1589–1603. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1251a

Basilaia G, Kvavadze D (2020) Transition to online education in schools during a SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in Georgia. Ped Res 5(4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/7937

Beiske B (2002) Research methods: uses and limitations of questionnaires, interviews, and case studies. School of Management Generic Research Methods, Manchester

Bergmann J, Sams A (2012) Flip your classroom: reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education, New York

Blau I, Shamir-Inbal T (2017) Re-designed flipped learning model in an academic course: the role of co-creation and co-regulation. Comput Educ 115:69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.014

Cevikbas M, Kaiser G (2020) Flipped classroom as a reform-oriented approach to teaching mathematics. Zdm 52(7):1291–1305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01191-5

Clark-Wilson A, Robutti O, Thomas M (2020) Teaching with digital technology. Zdm 52(7):1223–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01196-0

Chick RC, Clifton GT, Peace KM, Propper BW, Hale DF, Alseidi AA, Vreeland TJ (2020) Using technology to maintain the education of residents during the Covid-19 pandemic. J Surg Educ 3:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.03.018

Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K (2017) Research methods in education. Routledge, New York

Book   Google Scholar  

Collado-Valero J, Rodríguez-Infante G, Romero-González M, Gamboa-Ternero S, Navarro-Soria I, Lavigne-Cerván R (2021) Flipped classroom: active methodology for sustainable learning in higher education during social distancing due to COVID-19. Sustain 13(10):5336. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105336

Colomo-Magaña E, Soto-Varela R, Ruiz-Palmero J, Gómez-García M (2020) Percepción de estudiantes universitarios sobre la utilidad de la metodología del aula invertida. Educ Sci 10:275. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100275

Dhawan S (2020) Online learning: a panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. J Educ Technol Syst 49(1):5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018

ElSaheli-Elhage R (2021) Access to students and parents and levels of preparedness of educators during the COVID-19 emergency transition to e-learning. Int J Stud Educ 3(2):61–69. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonse.35

Fatani TH (2020) Student satisfaction with videoconferencing teaching quality during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Med Educ 20(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02310-2

Foldnes N (2016) The flipped classroom and cooperative learning: evidence from a randomised experiment. Act Learn High Educ 17(1):39–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415616726

Fontana MT (2020) Gamification of ChemDraw during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Investigating How a Serious, Educational-Game Tournament (Molecule Madness) impacts student wellness and organic chemistry skills while distance learning. J Chem Educ 97(9):3358–3368. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00722

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Goksu DY, Duran V (2020) Flipped Clasroom Model in the Context of Distant Training. Res High Educ Sci 104–127. https://www.isres.org/books/chapters/Rhes2020-104-127_29-12-2020.pdf . Accessed 20 Feb 2021

Gómez-Carrasco CJ, Monteagudo-Fernández J, Moreno-Vera JR, Sainz-Gómez M (2020) Evaluation of a gamification and flipped-classroom program used in teacher training: Perception of learning and outcome. PLoS ONE 15(7):e0236083. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236083

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

González Alonso J, Pazmiño Santacruz M (2015) Cálculo e interpretación del Alfa de Cronbach para el caso de validación de la consistencia interna de un cuestionario, con dos posibles escalas tipo Likert. Rev Publ 2(1):62–67

Guraya S (2020) Combating the COVID-19 outbreak with a technology-driven e-flipped classroom model of educational transformation. J Taibah Univ Med Sci 15(4):253–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.07.006

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Islam MA, Barna SD, Raihan H, Khan MNA, Hossain MT (2020) Depression and anxiety among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh: a web-based cross-sectional survey. PLoS ONE 15(8):e0238162. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238162

Lapitan LD, Tiangco CE, Sumalinog DAG, Sabarillo NS, Diaz JM (2021) An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educ Chem Eng 35:116–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.01.012

Latorre-Cosculluela C, Suárez C, Quiroga S, Sobradiel-Sierra N, Lozano-Blasco R, Rodríguez-Martínez A (2021) Flipped Classroom model before and during COVID-19: Using technology to develop 21st century skills. ITSE. ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0137

López D, García C, Bellot J, Formigós J, Maneau V (2016) Elaboración de material para la realización de experiencias de clase inversa (flipped classroom). In:Álvarez J, Grau S, Tortosa M (eds) Innovaciones metodológicas en docencia universitaria: resultados de investigación. Alicante, Spain, pp. 973–984

Love B, Hodge A, Grandgenett N, Swift AW (2014) Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol 45(3):317–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.822582

Mekler ED, Brühlmann F, Tuch AN, Opwis K (2017) Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance. Comput Hum Behav 71:525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.048

Monzonís NC, Méndez VG, Ariza AC, Magaña EC (2020) Aula invertida en tiempos de COVID-19: una perspectiva transversal. IJERI 15:326–341. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.5439

Naw N (2020) Designing a flipped classroom for Myanmar universities during COVID-19 crisis. Univ J ICT Multidiscip Iss Arts Sci Engineer Econ Educ 1:1–8

Park S, Kim S (2021) Is sustainable online learning possible with gamification?—The effect of gamified online learning on student learning. Sustain 13(8):4267

Quansah F (2017) The Use of cronbach alpha reliability estimate in research among students in public Universities In Ghana. Afr J Teach Educ 6(1):56–64. https://doi.org/10.21083/ajote.v6i1.3970

Smith E, Boscak A (2021) A virtual emergency: learning lessons from remote medical student education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerg Radiol 28(3):445–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-020-01874-2

Tang T, Abuhmaid AM, Olaimat M, Oudat DM, Aldhaeebi M, Bamanger E (2020) Efficiency of flipped classroom with online-based teaching under COVID-19. Interact Learn Environ 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1817761

Villa FG, Litago JDU, Sánchez-Fdez A (2020) Perceptions and expectations in the university students from adaptation to the virtual teaching triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Rev Lat Comun Soc 78:99–119

Waidi AA (2016) Employment of questionnaire as tool for effective business research outcome: problems and challenges. Glob Econ Observer 4(1):136

Wanner T, Palmer E (2015) Personalising learning: exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. Comput Educ 88:354–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.008

World Health Organization (2020) Critical preparedness, readiness and response actions for COVID-19. In: World Health Organization. Publications. Overview. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/critical-preparedness-readiness-and-response-actions-for-covid-19 . Accessed 5 Feb 2021

Wright GB (2011) Student-centered learning in higher education. Int J Teach Learn Higher Educ 23(1):92–97

Zainuddin Z, Perera CJ (2018) Supporting students’ self-directed learning in the flipped classroom through the LMS TES Blend Space. Horiz 26(4):281–290

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the “Spanish Ministry for Science, Innovation, and Universities. Secretary of State for Universities, Research, Development and Innovation”, grant number PGC2018-094491-B-C33, and “Seneca Foundation. Regional Agency for Science and Technology”, grant number 20874/PI/18. We would like to thank Stephen Hasler for his proofreading work. It was a pleasure to work with him.

Author information

These authors contributed equally: José María Campillo-Ferrer, Pedro Miralles-Martínez.

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Education, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

José María Campillo-Ferrer & Pedro Miralles-Martínez

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José María Campillo-Ferrer .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Campillo-Ferrer, J.M., Miralles-Martínez, P. Effectiveness of the flipped classroom model on students’ self-reported motivation and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8 , 176 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00860-4

Download citation

Received : 10 April 2021

Accepted : 05 July 2021

Published : 20 July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00860-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Distance learning: studying the efficiency of implementing flipped classroom technology in the educational system.

• Khaleel Al-Said
• Irina Krapotkina
• Nadezhda Maslennikova

Education and Information Technologies (2023)

Flipped Learning 4.0. An extended flipped classroom model with Education 4.0 and organisational learning processes

• María Luisa Sein-Echaluce
• Ángel Fidalgo-Blanco
• Francisco José García-Peñalvo

Universal Access in the Information Society (2022)

Medical student education through flipped learning and virtual rotations in radiation oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross sectional research

• Tae Hyung Kim
• Jin Sung Kim
• Jee Suk Chang

Radiation Oncology (2021)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Advertisement

The trends and outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018: A descriptive content analysis

• Published: 09 February 2021
• Volume 8 , pages 365–394, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Bengi Birgili   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2990-6717 1 , 4 ,
• Fatma Nevra Seggie 2 &
• Ebru Oğuz 3  

21k Accesses

55 Citations

5 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

As an innovative active learning method, flipped learning provides students with several opportunities. This study was conducted to reveal the trends and outcomes in research into the flipped learning approach published between 2012 and 2018. Descriptive content analysis was used to review 316 research and conceptual articles published in academic journals included in five significant databases that ascribe to journals the highest impact factor. The results indicate that most of the studies are conducted with students as the most frequent study group and with a mixed-method research design in the subject areas of education and medicine. The flipped learning approach is mostly conducted in higher education. As a region, Asia has taken the lead in flipped learning studies. Finally, the outcomes of flipped learning indicate an increase in student performance and positive influence on cognitive, affective, and soft skills.

Similar content being viewed by others

Enhancing the effectiveness of flipped classroom in health science education: a state-of-the-art review

Flipped classroom in higher education: a systematic literature review and research challenges

A Meta-Analysis of Learning and Moderator Variables in Flipped Education

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Communication, teamwork, problem-solving, creativity, and critical thinking are fundamental competencies for achievement in the twenty-first century (Chan et al. 2017 ). Today’s students, who are digital natives, have to be equipped with relevant competencies to respond to the demands of the modern world. For this reason, innovations in teaching–learning processes and instructional environments, which are essential to meet the needs of these learners, have brought active-learning pedagogy to the forefront of education.

Active learning is necessary for students to take part in the learning process and to make their learning permanent (Canaleta et al. 2014 ; Niemi et al. 2016 ). An important constraint of education is that teachers cannot simply transmit knowledge to students; rather students need to construct knowledge actively in their own minds (Olusegun 2015 ; Thompson 2013 ). “The recent constructivist learning theories emphasize learners' active contribution and self-regulative processes. Active learners have a high level of inquiry skills, and they construct their knowledge base by continuously learning, reflecting on, and controlling their own learning processes (e.g., Pintrich and McKeachie 2000 )” (Niemi and Nevgi 2014 , p. 134). Moreover, as a result of the evolution of knowledge, professional life requires learners to become life-long learners (Niemi and Nevgi 2014 ; Niemi et al. 2016 ). Active learning strategies, including independent questioning and the constructing of knowledge, emphasize constructivist qualities in knowledge processing, problem-solving action, and critical thinking, and this processing of knowledge results in an accommodation of knowledge (Jang and Kim 2004 ; Niemi 2002 ).

With recent developments in active-learning pedagogical approaches and advances in instructional design and technology, some educators encourage the implementation of an active and innovative educational model called flipped learning (Bergmann and Sams 2012 , 2014 ; Lopes and Soares 2018 ; Sletten 2017 ). Flipped learning establishes a novel framework within which students are provided with personalized education appropriate for individual learning needs (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ). The philosophy behind this approach is a sub-type of blended learning, bringing together the learning theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, social learning theory, constructivism, and connectivism. The course learning outcomes rely on Bloom’s taxonomy of learning (Bloom et al. 1956 ; MEF University 2015 ; Mennella 2016 ). These theories can be applied in different active learning experiences in a flipped learning environment and depends on the role of students, the role of the instructor, the use of technologies, the need for interaction and collaboration, key elements in online environment design, the need for learner training, key classroom elements, and the need for feedback (Şahin and Fell-Kurban 2016 , p. 47). The students can, for example, have the opportunity to watch the videos when they need at their own pace, so their performances are reinforced. During active participation, students can socialize with their classmates and the instructor. The interaction between students during socialization can boost their performance, their collaboration skills, and motivation. In addition, in line with cognitivism, students can enhance their procedural knowledge into declarative knowledge such that the previous knowledge gained in a pre-class activity affects the new higher order skills they gain in in-class activities (MEF University 2015 ; Şahin and Fell-Kurban 2016 , 2019 ).

The implementation of a flipped learning approach can take advantage of the increased occasions for constructivist teaching and learning that technology provides (Koohddang et al. 2009 ). Flipped learning has many potential benefits including more one-on-one interaction time between teacher and students, active learning and cooperation, and self-paced learning. Also, it provides students with flexibility in the event that they miss some lectures. In addition, flipped learning can be considered complimentary to the traditional classroom setting because it encourages classroom time to be arranged more toward active and collaborative learning (Roach 2014 ).

In recent years, flipped learning has been introduced to foster active learning in diverse educational contexts, including K-12 and higher education (Şahin and Fell-Kurban 2016 ; Hamdan et al. 2013 ). Since its first appearance in the classroom, discussions have frequently focused on the extent to which it is effective in student achievement. Studies have been conducted to determine its effectiveness in this area (Chao et al. 2015 ; Davis et al. 2013 ; Hwang and Lai 2017 ; Mennella 2016 ; Gomez-Tejedor et al. 2020 ; Zainuddin and Halili 2016 ) and to determine the quality of interaction between students, teachers, and the content of lessons (Christiansen et al. 2017 ; Yildiz-Durak 2018 ; Winter 2018 ). Other studies have examined the relationship between student perception and achievement, while prediction studies have focused on the outcomes of academic achievement (Sletten 2017 ). In line with these findings, our aim is to analyze previous studies on the flipped learning approach in general and their methodologies and results in particular to highlight the trends and outcomes of flipped learning research.

With the accumulated body of literature, we seek to answer the following two main research questions:

What are the trends of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018 in terms of: (a) research design, (b) subject area, (c) age, (d) educational stages (primary, secondary, and higher education), (e) geographic region, and (f) study group?

What are the outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018 in terms of student learning?

To answer these questions, we first review the literature on flipped learning, highlight important topics in the literature, and discuss the strengths of existing research and specific areas for development. In addition, we elaborate on how flipped learning is related to active learning environments and student learning.

Literature review

Flipped learning as a global movement.

Flipped learning, as a general model, is a framework that empowers instructors to reach every student in their teaching and learning processes (Bergmann 2018 ). Flipped learning allows educators to modify their traditional classroom environment so as to introduce course content and basic learning attainments to learners before meeting in class and to use class time to guide each student with active learning experiences (Sams and Bergmann 2013 ). This approach helps educators to reconsider their roles and those of their learners for the efficient use of instructional time through interaction. As a teaching approach, flipped learning also provides an opportunity to transform the basic traditional teaching method that places teachers at the center of the learning experience. Outside class, educators provide basic instruction via videos, allowing them to make the best use of time in class by applying a wide range of active learning strategies, methods, and techniques (Bergmann and Sams 2012 , 2014 ; Bergmann 2018 ; Reidsema et al. 2017 ; Fell-Kurban 2019 ; Şahin and Fell-Kurban 2016 ; Zhan et al. 2017 ).

Flipped learning was pioneered in 2012 by John Bergmann and Aeron Sams who are both high-school chemistry teachers. They had coined the term “flipped classroom” in 2002 and the term has since gained widespread use. They initially designed this approach for students who miss classes. In 2016, a global coalition of educators, scholars, researchers, practitioners, technologists, and leaders in flipped learning formed the Flipped Learning Global Initiative (FLGI). The organization supports the adoption of flipped learning worldwide, including in the USA, the UK, Taiwan, China, Turkey, the UAE, Spain, and Italy (FLGI 2018a ; McCarthy 2016 ). The launch of the FLGI contributed to the replacement of the popular term “flipped classroom” with “flipped learning” to reflect an expanded understanding of this approach as one that serves an environment-independent teaching rather than just a means of class organization.

Since its first implementation in K-12 schools by Bergmann and Sams, Eric Mazur, a professor at Harvard University, has worked to popularize flipped learning in higher education. The approach and the proposed framework are gaining worldwide recognition as useful in subject areas such as science, medicine, engineering, mathematics, education, literature, and law (Bergmann and Sams 2012 , 2014 ; Bergmann 2018 ; Lin et al. 2019 ). Higher education institutions such as Harvard and Stanford in the USA and the first fully flipped university, MEF University in Turkey, have become pioneers of this global movement in the context of tertiary education (FLGI 2018b ; Şahin and Fell-Kurban 2016 ).

One reason for this trend being quickly adopted is that the knowledge of the discipline is easily integrated with active learning environments (Hwang et al. 2015 ). Universities wishing to use the flipped learning approach have adopted the model with relative ease as it can be integrated into existing teaching and learning systems in a systematic way without the need to rebuild an institution’s culture and organizational structure. To facilitate the spread of the flipped learning approach worldwide with the best practices and technologies, universities such as Harvard, Stanford and MEF have collaborated in setting out 187 standards. In November 2018, these standards were made public at the Flipped Learning 3.0 Global Standards Summit at MEF University (Flipped Learning 3.0 Global Standards Summit  2018 ). This summit established an understanding that flipped learning is more than simply uploading lecture recordings, as was simplistically believed in the past (Sams and Bergmann 2013 ). In the process of flipped learning, learners encounter the course content or outline for the first time via a short video. They complete some preliminary course objectives online and complete a learning activity aligned with class objectives. Learners can thus learn high-level course topics and engage with the instructor and peers by being fully active in the learning environment.

The benefits and drawbacks of flipped learning

As an emerging teaching and learning model in the educational context, flipped learning presents several advantages and some drawbacks. As for the benefits, the approach allows the presentation of new material before meeting in class, thus preparing students for the in-class teaching and learning process (Crouch and Mazur 2001 ). As such, it fosters a more productive relationship between instructors and students (McCarthy 2016 ) where students can learn at their own pace (Molnar 2017 ) and take responsibility for their own learning (Kim et al. 2017 ). The approach also provides teachers the opportunity to select from a large pool of learning activities such as mastery learning (Bloom 1968 ), peer instruction (Mazur 1997 ), cooperative learning (White and Frederiksen 1998 ), role-playing (Van Ments 1999 ), inquiry-based learning (Prince and Vigeant 2006 ), and 5-E strategy (Hew et al. 2018 ).

Numerous studies of learning outcomes in flipped learning have helped us understand its effectiveness and advocated its benefits. All the academic work conducted over the years has shown that flipped learning has a positive effect on students’ learning outcomes, success, and/or academic achievement (see Oh et al. 2017 ; Tsai et al. 2017 for detail). Based on the literature and practices, our research begins with the assumption that flipped learning positively affects learning outcomes.

Besides the benefits, there are also some drawbacks to this approach. One is the quality of the videos. When these are too long and include several goals, they distort the purpose of the “one video-one goal” concept, leading to a lack of clarity and confusion (Brame 2016 ). Another challenge is that older learners seem to resist the use of the flipped learning approach (Hewitt 2017 ; Quarato 2016 ). In addition, if students come to class unprepared without having watched the video, instructors cannot proceed with the course as planned (Bognar et al. 2018 ) or students cannot follow the coursework presented to them in class (Heo and Chun 2018 ). Finally, weekly course video preparation can be demanding for instructors and thus result in videos that can be unattractive to the students (Nielsen 2011 ). For example, Harrison et al. ( 2016 ) used a mixed-method design with 59 engineering students as research participants. The findings reveal that, probably because of poor video usage by the learners, there was a marginally significant negative effect in attending the hybrid-flipped learning environment on the total course score as well as a negative effect on homework performance. While flipped learning is an effective approach for students’ learning outcomes, instructors cannot be sure that students will watch all the videos before attending class. Poor video viewing rates may be due to the quality of the video content. Any tendency of learners to refuse to take part in lesson preparation, may result in a negative effect on their academic performance (Fidalgo-Blanco et al. 2017 ; Harrison et al. 2016 ).

Flipped learning approach as part of an active learning environment

The term “flipped classroom” was used until 2012 in reference to both active and passive instructional experiences. It was understood as a classroom type or model which many scholars (Bristol 2014 ) and even founders (Sams 2011 ) envisioned as an effective student-centered classroom characterized by the replacement of in-class lectures with co-curricular activities and by the facilitation of students’ ability to access their course materials outside of class (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ; Thongkoo et al. 2019a ). In other words, flipped learning started out as a classroom model. However, upon the increase of the acceptance of the model in various proceedings and abstracts (Karariga and Knox 2012 ; Parslow 2012 ; Thoms 2012 ), in a second wave of interest it transitioned into the flipped learning approach. This approach is now considered a comprehensive pedagogical approach involving interactive, higher order activities and thinking processes. Active learning is at its center owing to the interaction between teacher–student, student–student, and even student–content (Thongkoo et al. 2019a , b ).

Active learning is a “Grand Meta Principle” within the flipped learning framework (Barkley 2009 ; Bergmann 2018 ). Class time is commonly used as a resource for putting active experiences into the hands of students, allowing their minds to be constantly engaged (Prince 2004 ; Silberman 1996 ). Flipped learning is, therefore, seen as a learning approach that promotes active engagement (Bond 2020 ). After watching online pre-learning course videos or doing assignments during their individual work time, learners experience active learning sessions in their classrooms. During these facilitated active learning experiences, they have the opportunity to conduct research, reflect, inquire, test their hypotheses and beliefs, draw conclusions, lead discussions, and give counterexamples. They are involved in hands-on activities; hence, their cognitive performance is higher (Bergmann and Sams 2012 , 2014 ).

Educators use classrooms or learning environments to lead each learner through interactive and innovative experiences of course content using contemporary tools and technologies. During their courses, learners not only remember and understand the content but also apply, analyze, evaluate, and create it (Krathwohl 2002 ). For example, students can investigate an authentic problem or a real-world challenge with a blend of project-based learning and the flipped approach (Niemi 2002 ). The aim is to enrich the learning experience by engaging learners in understanding the problem, providing solutions, and designing and creating a model. This enriched experience is geared to promote higher order skills (Chi 2009 ). They are challenged by thinking more critically and deeply so that they are able to make connections between old and new knowledge.

Flipped learning: with or without technology

The flipped learning approach transforms the classroom into an interactive platform where information is transformed into knowledge and experience. Students have an opportunity to participate actively in the course and to transform the information into knowledge in a process facilitated by the instructor. That is to say, while the student is taught in the traditional teaching method, s/he learns in this approach. This active learning approach is expected to be positively reflected in extra-curricular activities. The aim is to enable students to receive an education that prioritizes their entrepreneurial, innovative thinking, and creativity skills. To achieve this purpose, digital technologies, which increasingly affect all areas of our life, are also used in the planning and execution of educational processes (Sargent and Casey 2020 ; Zeybek 2020 ).

Flipped learning cannot be imagined without the use of technology. In every flipped learning approach, technology has to be integrated into teaching and learning activities. Internet technology is recasting education. Massive open online platforms offering courses such as Coursera, edX, Udemy or learning management systems such as Blackboard have facilitated the application of flipped learning to remote learning. Before 2012, while the idea of flipped learning was limited to the idea of the “flipped classroom”, technology was an independent tool that could be integrated into education. By contrast, it is now an essential milieu of this pedagogical approach. Video or Web 2.0 tools can be integrated into flipped learning. Teachers, professors, and other educators now apply emerging technologies developed by others.

Thus, flipped learning is an approach that integrates technology in varying degrees to enhance the learning experience. For example, an analysis of 316 papers used in this study to highlight trends and outcomes of research into the flipped learning approach shows the number of the studies that used several technological tools to support flipped learning in 2012–2018 (see Fig.  1 ). The distribution of technologies referred to in the research papers lends itself to the following categories: MOOC (e.g., Coursera, Udemy, edX, Courseware, MIT); video (e.g., YouTube, TED-Ed, Khan Academy, video lectures, Vodecast, animation); learning management systems [LMS] (e.g., Moodle, Blackboard, Desire2Learn, iLearn); Web 2.0 Tools (e.g., EDpuzzle, Kahoot!, Scratch, Google Forms, Padlet, Online Quiz); audio recordings (e.g., podcasts); social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter); learning labs (e.g., E-book, Cengage, Pearson Learning Catalytics, eXeCute); video conference tools (e.g., Zoom, Skype); CD, DVD, CD-ROM; simulations (e.g., simulator models); and no information in which the papers did not specify the tools.

Distribution of the technologies used in Flipped Learning in 2012–2018

The rationale for a comprehensive review of studies on the flipped learning approach and the significance of this study

Research on the growth of flipped learning, the “flipped” or “inverted” classroom, has been conducted since 2011, but Talbert defined the studies from 2000 to 2013 as flipped learning studies (Talbert 2017 ). Based on Fig.  2 , in our study, we accept the year in which the concept of flipped learning was used as 2012.

Growth of flipped learning research (Talbert 2017 p. 2)

Although flipped learning has spread throughout the world exponentially in the last 17 years (see Fig.  2 ), no consensus has been established between first-hand practitioners on many aspects of this approach (Hew and Lo 2018 ; Tucker 2012 ; Winter 2018 ) and hence there are different forms of practice (Bristol 2014 ; Brown 2016 ; Kardaş and Yeşilyaprak 2015 ). Some scholars have explained that literature reviews of flipped learning models had failed to reach a consensus on the definition of the term “flipped learning.” For instance, clichés such as “school work at home and home work at school” (Lage et al. 2000 , p. 32), “videos at home”, and it is “all about watching videos at home and then doing worksheets in class” do not involve the sufficient range of flipped learning approaches. Some have proposed (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ) that flipped learning is a type of individualized learning method in which differentiated instruction, inquiry-based learning, and demonstrations are some of the practical strategies.

The practices and experiences of educators using the flipped approach, together with the growing volume of relevant literature, indicate an increasingly widespread embrace of the use of flipped learning in teaching and learning situations. Meta-analysis studies, meta-synthesis, narrative reviews, and descriptive content analysis studies are important to understand the outcomes of the flipped learning approach in terms of student achievement and effective learning. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to explore the trends and outcomes of the flipped learning approach to identify any gaps in the related literature and determine the extent of its utility. This exploration also will help researchers to identify gaps in the literature and enable instructors and administrators to intervene in areas that require further development of the model in a more effective way.

Some systematic review studies (Akçayır and Akçayır 2018 ; Bond 2020 ; Låg and Sæle 2019 ; Lo and Hew 2017 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ; Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ; Zainuddin et al. 2019a , b ; Zou et al. 2020 ) collate and highlight the results of primary studies on the effectiveness of flipped learning on academic performance, student or staff satisfaction, level of engagement, active instructional strategies, and possible challenges. However, some of these reviews include studies with relatively short publication date coverage. For example, Akçayır and Akçayır’s ( 2018 ) study is limited in its publication date coverage (covering only 2 years) and scrutinized a total of 71 full SSCI published articles on the Web of Science database alone while Zainuddin and et al. ( 2019a ) selected 48 articles published between 2017 and 2018 as samples. In addition, other reviews include articles that are limited in terms of variables as their unit of analysis focusing only on one learner type, one academic discipline, or one education level. For instance, O’Flaherty and Phillips ( 2015 ) selected 28 publications between 1994 and 2014, written in English peer-reviewed journals, and conducted only at the level of higher education.

In contrast to these review studies, the current study aimed to analyze the trend of flipped learning with several variables as units of analysis and a longer publication date coverage. This type of review will help us to map the effect of the flipped learning approach from different perspectives and construct a big picture with relation to numerous variables.

Moreover, whereas some previous studies review only one discipline and one learner group that might be advantageous for being highly focused in the flipped learning era, we felt it essential to review papers with different variables and thus consider 316 papers. However, we did not aim solely to look at its advantages in a particular area of education, for example medicine or engineering; we considered the scope and variables to highlight the general trends of flipped learning. In addition, we tried to determine at what educational level flipped learning provides benefits. We investigated to what extent it is used for each type of learning group rather than a single group of learners and searched for the most preferred educational level. Most importantly, we looked at how flipped learning plays a role as an educational tool. Hence, we are able to identify the gaps in the literature and areas that need further investigation.

In this study, we reviewed articles indexed in five high-factor databases together with the Social Sciences Citation Indexed (SSCI) journals (Clarivate Analytics 2020 ). By analyzing more studies with wider time intervals, such as between 2012 and 2018, we explored studies from across the globe using six variables (research design, subject area, age, educational stages, geographic region and study group) to produce a comprehensive review that highlights the trends and outcomes of flipped learning research in English publications around the world.

2012 was a watershed year for flipped learning (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ; Bond 2020 ; Talbert 2012 , 2017 ) as this was the point at which it began to be used as an active pedagogy as well as becoming the subject of academic research. Having examined the databases for the publications between 2000 and 2012 (e.g. Web of Science), the abstracts of conference proceedings have been disseminated. A search of the keyword “Flipped Classroom” revealed ten publications, three of which (medicine, biochemistry, pharmacology) were conference proceedings publications and the others were abstracts of proceedings. A search of the keyword “Inverted Classroom” revealed 13 publications, all of which were engineering conference papers and abstracts. Finally, a search of the keyword “Flipped Learning” revealed only one conference summary. The keywords “inverted learning” and “inverted classroom” were not employed in the search as this would make our results incomprehensive due to the fact that after 2012 flipped education began to be considered a pedagogical approach rather than a classroom type.

As reported in other systematic review studies in the related literature, flipped learning was systematically reviewed in five publications of Web of Science Core Collection database in the last 5 years (Bond 2020 ; Gianoni-Capenakas et al. 2019 ; Karabulut-Ilgu et al. 2018 ; Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ; Voronina et al. 2017 ; Zou et al. 2020 ). Two of five publications were analyzed particularly in engineering education: 62 articles were included between 2000 and May 2015 in Karabulut-Ilgu et al.’s ( 2018 ) study, whereas 87 articles were included until 2017 in Voronina et al.’s ( 2017 ) study. One publication, Gianoni-Capenakas et al. ( 2019 ), conducted a systematic review of the eight qualitative studies on the effectiveness of flipped learning on dentistry students’ learning and perceptions. The other two publications, very recent studies, were conducted in English Language Teaching by Turan and Akdag-Cimen ( 2020 ) and flipped language classrooms by Zou et al. ( 2020 ). Turan and Akdag-Cimen ( 2020 ) studied 43 articles taken from 5 databases between 2010 and 2018. They examined the trends in flipped learning in terms of years, research methods, education levels, countries of articles, and the main findings in terms of focusing on basic language skills, advantages and challenges, and effectiveness in English Language Teaching. Zou et al. ( 2020 ) studied 34 SSCI articles only from 14 different journals between 2015 and 2019. They examined flipped language classrooms in terms of publication year, journal, the target language such as English, Chinese or others, participants’ education level, sample size, the learning tools used pre, during, and after class activities, and the effect of flipped learning in terms of learning outcomes such as motivation, engagement, academic performance, etc. Finally, Bond’s ( 2020 ) systematic review uncovered the effectiveness of flipped learning exclusively on student engagement in K-12. As a comprehensive review study, she reviewed 107 articles from seven databases between 2017 and 2019, including uncategorized articles. She discusses the findings in relation to, study characteristics such as geography, study design, methodological characteristics; how to define student engagement; theoretical frameworks; student dis/engagement and flipped learning in K-12, particularly behavioral dis/engagement, affective dis/engagement, cognitive dis/engagement.

To sum up, this current study relies on a systematic review focusing on the trends and outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018. This study differs from others with its approach that uncovers the demographic trends such as research design, subject area, age, educational stages, geographic region, and study group and the outcomes. Our study is distinguished from others in that, to the current date, it reviews the largest number of articles.

Research methods and procedures

This study was conducted using descriptive content analysis (Cohen et al. 2007 ). The data were collected from five databases: Web of Science, Science Direct, ERIC, ProQuest, and Ebsco, which are the most inclusive journals with the highest impact factors (Clarivate Analytics 2020 ). The initial data included all available publications: 196 in Web of Science, 105 in Science Direct, 157 in ERIC, 146 in Proquest, and 192 in Ebsco. The keywords employed were “flipped learning”, “flipped classroom”, and “flipped learning approach” in all academic disciplines in K-16 settings beginning from 2012, when the first work on flipped learning was published (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ), up to and including 2018. The criteria for inclusion are that the studies: (1) focus on flipped learning, (2) were published between 2012 and 2018, (3) were published in English, and (4) cover empirical research published in peer-reviewed journals. Duplications across databases, publications that were not empirical, and publications with inaccessible full articles were excluded. The final data included 316 empirical research articles in their full versions.

To answer the first question and identify the trends of flipped learning research in terms of research design, subject area, age, educational stage (primary, secondary, and higher education), geographic region, and study group, two researchers documented relevant information into a table. Later, the information extrapolated was cross-checked and finalized. The final relevant information was coded into categories for each of the above-mentioned pre-identified groups by two researchers and cross-checked again. The agreement rate between the coders was found to be 92% (Miles and Huberman 1994 ).

To answer the second question and identify the outcomes of flipped learning research in terms of student learning, two researchers identified the codes while reading each article and found relations between them. Two coders worked independently on the same data. Evaluating the intercoder reliability of a coding frame, the two researchers engaged in an agreement–disagreement discussion. Analyses of the two coders were compared, eliminating 30 irrelevant codes. They then organized the codes into categories and filtered them from 40 to 20. These 20 categories were then categorized into themes, again after agreement–disagreement discussion. This process resulted in a total of 103 codes, 20 categories, and 5 themes. The agreement rate between the coders was found to be 85% (Miles and Huberman 1994 ). To illustrate, during the coding process of the Theme: Increase in Performance , the two coders assigned phrases such as “promote learning capability”, “enhance academic experience”, “positive impact on students' achievement”, “supported effective mathematics teaching”, and “significantly higher quiz scores in biology” into a performance category. All phrases related to results of the reviewed studies were extracted and then coded into a group of similar content in a codebook table. Final coding was objectively compared with the two coders and then thematized under the heading of positive influence of flipped learning on students’ performance (see ‘ Part 2: Outcomes in flipped learning research ’ for detail). The first coder found 142 phrases whereas the second coder found 161 phrases related to achievement, performance, and learning. However, they discovered 19 articles revealed no difference in terms of the effectiveness of flipped learning on performance. Hence, they created a coalition session and agreed on the number and theme of the positive influence of flipped learning on students’ performance.

As for the data analysis, to determine the trends in flipped learning research, each article was first coded and then categorized according to its research design (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method), subject area (arts, arts and letters, design and architecture, economics and administrative science, education, engineering, medicine, law, and science and applied science), the age of the research participants and their educational stage (primary, secondary, and higher education), the geographic region where the study took place, and target study group (teachers, students). Where the related information was not present in the article, it was labelled as non-categorized.

In relation to the outcomes of flipped learning research, we first screened the findings of the articles and counted the number of times keywords, key phrases, or concepts occurred. These occurrences were coded and categorized according to similarity in meaning. During the categorization stage, the primary investigator and the third investigator reviewed the data independently and came up with their own categorizations. After the comparison of the categories, revisions were made and groupings were finalized. This helped to ensure the reliability of the categories. As a result, five themes emerged.

This section is divided into two. The first part presents the results related to the first research question, the trends of flipped learning research. In the second part, the results of the outcomes of flipped learning research are documented in terms of the themes that emerged from the data.

Part 1: trends in flipped learning research

Research design.

The selected studies mostly utilize a mixed-method research design ( f  = 144, around 46%) and some studies employ a quantitative research design ( f  = 108, around 34%). The least frequently used was a qualitative research design ( f  = 51, around 16%). In addition, around 4% of the research articles ( f  = 13) did not specify their research design approach (see Fig. 3 ).

Distribution of articles by research design

Subject area

The flipped learning subject areas of the 316 reviewed studies also were examined. The data indicate a wide range of the subject area of each study: (1) education, (2) medicine, (3) engineering, (4) economics, and administrative science, (5) law, (6) arts, design and architecture, (7) science and applied science, (8) arts and letters, and (9) uncategorized.

Most of the research in the reviewed studies was conducted in the fields of education (i.e., teacher education, educational sciences, English language teaching, mathematics education, science education, educational psychology, educational technology) ( f  = 126, 38%) and medicine (i.e., nursing, dentistry, physiotherapy, pharmacy, adult health) ( f  = 51, 16%). Flipped learning research studies have also been conducted in the fields of engineering (i.e., biotechnology, big data, computing, robotics) ( f  = 34, 10%); economics and administrative science (i.e., marketing, business, management, business communication, tourism, project management) ( f  = 36, 11%); and law ( f  = 2, 1%). In addition, some of the reviewed studies that rely on the flipped learning approach were conducted in the fields of arts, design and architecture ( f  = 1, 0.3%); science and applied science (i.e., mathematics, chemistry, science, physics, biology, food science) ( f  = 44, 13%); arts and letters (i.e., psychology, English, literacy, history, geography, sociology, library) ( f  = 29, 9%).

Finally, some of the reviewed studies were uncategorized ( f  = 6; 2%) as the research papers did not specify the subject area (see Fig. 4 ).

Distribution of articles by subject area

The age range of participants cited in the related studies seemed to have a high variability. The researchers, therefore, scattered the data around the frequency rates as follows: participants ( f  = 95) below the age of 10 (1%), 10–19.5 (45%), 20–29.5 (73%), 30–39.5 (19%), 40–49.5 (13%), and 50 + (5%). These findings show that most participants were aged 20–29.5. Some of the reviewed studies adopting the flipped learning approach were uncategorized as the research papers did not specify the age of the participants ( f  = 221; 70%) (see Fig. 5 ).

Distribution of articles by age of participants

Educational stage: primary, secondary or higher education

Concerning the category of educational stage, the studies seemed to be conducted frequently in settings of higher education ( f  = 268; 84%) while fewer studies were conducted at the primary/preschool ( f  = 7; 2%) and secondary school ( f  = 39; 12%) levels. A few of the reviewed studies were uncategorized ( f  = 7; 2%) as the research papers did not specify the educational stage of participants (see Fig. 6 ).

Distribution of articles by educational stage

Geographic region

Finally, the studies were systematically examined in terms of the continents and countries in which each study was conducted (see Fig.  7 ). The results show the studies took place largely in Asia, the Americas, Australia, Europe, Eurasia, Footnote 1 and Africa.

Distribution of articles by geographic region

To illustrate, Asia ( f  = 109): Taiwan ( f  = 31), South Korea ( f  = 27), China ( f  = 15); Hong Kong ( f  = 6), Japan ( f  = 5), Malaysia ( f  = 4), Iran ( f  = 4), the UAE ( f  = 4), Jordan ( f  = 3), India ( f  = 2), Thailand ( f  = 2), Qatar ( f  = 2), Israel ( f  = 1), Lebanon ( f  = 1), Oman ( f  = 1), Vietnam ( f  = 1); the Americas ( f  = 108): the USA ( f  = 100), Canada ( f  = 5); Jamaica ( f  = 1), Argentina ( f  = 1), Brazil ( f  = 1); Europe ( f  = 36): the UK ( f  = 15), Spain ( f  = 6), Italy ( f  = 2), Greece ( f  = 2), Ireland ( f  = 2), Sweden ( f  = 1), Denmark ( f  = 1), Northern Macedonia ( f  = 1), the Netherlands ( f  = 1), Norway ( f  = 1), Austria ( f  = 1), Slovenia ( f  = 1), Belgium ( f  = 1), Portugal ( f  = 1); Australia ( f  = 21); and Eurasia ( f  = 17): Turkey ( f  = 14), the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus ( f  = 2) and Russia ( f  = 1); Africa ( f  = 6); Oceania ( f  = 3): New Zealand ( f  = 3); and Uncategorized ( f  = 16) as the research papers did not specify the geographic region (see Fig.  7 ).

Study group

Most of the studies in the literature selected students as participants. Almost 90% of them used students to do experimental research, correlation research, or to solicit their opinions and perceptions. Only 3% of the studies, on the other hand, selected teachers as participants. Only one of the studies focused on both teachers and students as the study group (see Fig. 8 ).

Distribution of articles by study group

To investigate the outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018 in terms of student learning, the researchers employed the content analysis method on the results section of the reviewed studies. The current trend revealed five themes: an increase in student performance, a positive influence on the cognitive domain, a positive influence on the affective domain, a positive influence on soft skills, and flipped learning as an advantageous learning method. These themes are explained (see Fig.  9 ) in detail.

The themes on outcomes of flipped learning research

Part 2: outcomes in flipped learning research

Themes: the positive influence of flipped learning on student performance.

One hundred and forty-two articles suggest a positive influence of the flipped learning approach on student performance. Some sample categories showing positive influences are as follows: “improvement in learning” (e.g., Deng 2018 ), “effective blended learning” (e.g., Fadol et al. 2018 ), “enhancement in learner performance” (e.g., Salem 2018 ), “advancement in learning skills” (e.g., Shyr and Chen 2018 ), and “impact on student achievement” (e.g., He et al. 2018 ). For instance, Lee and Wallace ( 2018 ) conducted an action research study with 79 students in higher education and divided an English language teaching (ELT) classroom into flipped and non-flipped sections. Their findings demonstrate a difference between the students in the flipped classroom and those in the non-flipped classroom in terms of average course scores in favor of the flipped class, although only the final examination mean score indicated any statistical significance.

To conclude, the content analysis of the results of the related literature show that most of the studies prove that the flipped learning approach is a highly effective teaching method in terms of student performance, academic achievement, and overall learning.

Themes: the positive influence of flipped learning on cognitive domain

Twenty-two of the articles indicate a positive influence of the flipped learning approach on student cognitive thinking skills. Some sample categories showing positive influences on students’ cognitive domain are as follows: “improvement in students’ critical thinking skills” (e.g., Dehghanzadeh and Jafaraghaee 2018 ), “enhancement in higher order thinking skills” (e.g., Hu and Hsu 2018 ), “contributions to high‐level cognitive skills” (e.g., Winter 2018 ), and “reduction of cognitive load” (e.g., Ponikwer and Patel 2018 ). To investigate the effects of flipped learning on the cognitive domain, a qualitative case study conducted by Long et al. ( 2017 ) in the USA analyzed instructors’ experiences and perspectives on using the flipped classroom model in instruction in a higher education institution. Eight faculty members were interviewed and the analysis revealed that flipped learning can provide students with the opportunities for higher order thinking and problem-solving skills.

To conclude, the content analysis of the results of the related literature reveal that 22 studies proved that the flipped learning approach is effective in enhancing students’ cognitive thinking skills, promoting higher order thinking and cognitive load, and/or providing flexibility.

Themes: the positive influence of flipped learning on the affective domain

One hundred and fourteen articles indicate a positive influence on students’ affective skills. Some sample categories showing positive influences on students’ affective domain are as follows: “facilitation of interactive collaboration”, “enhancement of collaborative skills” Footnote 2 (e.g., Trust et al. 2018 ), “positive attitude toward course delivery” (e.g., Bakla 2018 ), “positive perceptions”, “student learning motivation”, “higher classroom participation” (e.g., Rodriguez et al. 2018 ), “an enjoyable academic experience” (e.g., Merlin-Knoblich and Camp 2018 ), and “improvement in engagement and creativity”. An interesting example of such studies occurred in Taiwan, where Bhagat et al. ( 2016 ) studied 82 15-year-old secondary school mathematics students for 6 weeks. The students were able to ask questions after watching the lesson videos during flipped instruction. The findings indicate not only a significant difference in learning achievement but also in the motivation levels between the two groups of students.

To conclude, the content analysis of the results of the related literature shows that 114 studies revealed that the flipped learning approach enhances students’ affective skills such as motivation, engagement, attitude, interest, and enjoyment.

Themes: the positive influence of flipped learning on soft skills

Thirty-seven of the articles indicate the positive influence of the flipped learning approach on students’ soft skills such as “improvement in note-taking ability”, “less procrastination”, “increased academic identity”, “increased ownership of student learning” (e.g., Chivata and Oviedo 2018 ), “more autonomy and self-directedness” (e.g., Narendran et al. 2018 ), “enhanced flexibility and interactivity” (e.g., Murray et al. 2017 ), “improvement in goal setting and self-management skills” (e.g., Çakıroğlu and Öztürk 2017 ). For example, a UK-based study in medical education was conducted by Gostelow et al. ( 2018 ). Two hundred and eighty-nine participants were included in the study. They examined future doctors’ clinical practice and attitudinal changes while dealing with global health problems. As a result, it was confirmed that the flipped structure of the learning process increased the students’ interaction and flexibility.

Themes: flipped learning as a positive learning method

Fifty of the articles show flipped learning to be a positive learning method as shown with the follow categories: “increase in positive feedback from instructors”, “feedback of the teaching in a positive way” (e.g., Christiansen et al. 2017 ), “positive feedback toward the methodology and activities” (e.g., Rodriguez 2015 ), “effective guidance of the pupils”, “student preference for the blended learning approach” (e.g., Jarvis et al. 2014 ), “high student acceptance rate of the learning method”, and “high student recognition of the model’s advantages” (e.g., Hao 2016 ). For instance, Caligaris et al. ( 2016 ) in Argentina conducted a survey with students to investigate a first practice of flipped classroom with numerical analysis. They questioned the extent to which students benefitted from the flipped learning and were concerned about learning through video-recorded classes. The results indicate students’ higher acceptance of the flipped classroom method and satisfaction with the videos.

The content analysis of the results of the related literature show that 50 articles found the flipped learning approach to be a positive learning method.

The current study aimed to investigate two main research questions: “What were the trends of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018 in terms of research design, subject area, age, educational stages (primary, secondary, and higher education), geographic region, study group?” and “What were the outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018 in terms of student learning?” Our research indicates a consensus that the flipped learning approach increases student achievement and fosters a positive attitude toward learning and motivation. Moreover, it plays an important role in the diversification of teaching methods.

Flipped learning as an effective teaching and learning model

Flipped learning seems to be used as an effective teaching and learning method increasingly around the globe. As this study shows, the volume of research conducted on flipped learning is growing daily. The findings emphasize that flipped learning helps students learn information more permanently compared to other modes of teaching and that it boosts students’ academic performance and overall success. Active learning strategies are among the most efficient ways of facilitating permanent learning in education and in other fields, leading to a new area of exploration in the literature (Zhan et al. 2017 ).

Trends in flipped learning research

Most of the research on the flipped learning approach uses a mixed-method research design (Awidi and Paynter 2019 ; Chang and Hwang 2018 ; Murphy et al. 2016 ; Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ). Using multiple methods of data collection ensures that results are more accurate and comprehensive. Furthermore, the results of the quantitative research methods contribute to the general applicability of the data. The difficulty of conducting qualitative research (Chivata and Oviedo 2018 ) and of evaluating flipped learning (Pardo and Mirriahi 2017 ) was also revealed. This difficulty has been observed in studies undertaken first in the fields of applied sciences and education. The studies carried out in the field of healthcare, especially in nursing, prove how effective flipped learning can be in applied sciences. The use of flipped learning in the field of education (e.g., Çukurbaşı and Kıyıcı 2018 ) and medicine (e.g., Telford and Senior 2017 ) is more common that than in other disciplines. It is clear that applications in the field of education and medicine should be supported and new applications of flipped learning should be envisioned.

Flipping is a teaching method used mostly in high schools and universities (Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ; Zou et al. 2020 ) and most of the studies reviewed here focus on graduate and first-year undergraduate-level students. It is also possible to observe the use of flipped learning with lower levels. Various instructional methods such as problem-based learning and discovery learning are used by teachers concurrently with flipped learning (Namaziandost and Çakmak 2020 ). Not only the students but also teachers or pre-service teachers’ (e.g., Hao and Lee 2016 ; Sun et al. 2019 ) experiences, perceptions, and in-class applications should be scientifically investigated so that gaps in the literature regarding teachers’ experiences and perceptions can be filled.

In sum, the current review study shows the trends in flipped learning research preferred using mostly mixed methods followed by quantitative method research design, the majority of the participating students were aged between 20 and 29.5, and their educational stage was mostly higher education followed by secondary education. These findings are in agreement with the results of the study conducted by Turan and Akdag-Cimen ( 2020 ). They determined similar trends but only within the scope of ELT flipped classrooms. In addition, Zou et al. ( 2020 ) found similar trends in their reviewed studies in flipped language classrooms in general with a study group that was mainly university students (5% were secondary school students) who wrote frequently in English. Both studies reviewed articles about flipped language classrooms and reached conclusions in boarder perspectives as reported by the trends in the current study. However, those studies examined flipped learning research in English only (Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ) and in English or Chinese etc. (Zou et al. 2020 ). Unlike the current study, Zou et al. selected the trends in flipped learning as popular journals flipped learning published, theoretical frameworks and instructional approaches used in the reviewed studies, and video-watching tools and evaluation methods in language classrooms. Further, this current study is distinguished from previous systematic reviews in the literature by the selection of perspectives: subject area, age of the participants, and geographic region.

Most of the scholarship done into flipped learning originates from countries in Asia, followed by those in the Americas and Europe. Considering the recent increase in the success of students in Asian countries on international exams, it could be said that trying different methods of teaching in education could be effective. For example, Hung ( 2019 ) explains Taiwan’s curricular reform and its effect on decision-making in the classroom. He discusses how self-reflection actively contributes to the structure of teaching style and curricular-instructional decision-making in Taiwan. In addition, learning from the research and practice that is being done by other countries could be instrumental in transforming the cultural structure as well as the education system of a country. We see that flipped learning research is especially widespread in Asia where flipped learning is widely accepted. The leading positions of countries such as Taiwan (e.g., Turan and Akdag-Cimen 2020 ; Chyr et al. 2018 ; Wu et al. 2017 ), China (e.g., Deng 2018 ; Zhonggen and Liheng 2017 ), and South Korea (e.g., Choi and Lee 2018 ; Park and Park 2018 ) in terms of flipped learning indicates the level to which flipped learning approach is used in these countries. The Americas follows Asia and it is an accepted approach particularly in the leading universities of the USA. We recommend that it be extended to other regions such as Africa and Europe. We also recommend systematic research and dissemination of results in other countries. In addition, it may be insightful to increase the number of studies in which teachers (Zou 2020 ) are more involved.

Outcomes in flipped learning research

Outcomes of the studies highlight the positive effects of the flipped learning model on students’ academic and personal skills. We have stated that the flipped learning approach is based on Bloom's taxonomy. The results indicate that flipped learning enables students to reach the dimension of cognitive high-level thinking skills (Shi et al. 2020 ). However, further studies need to investigate the attitudes (Birgili et al. 2019 ) and the psychomotor characteristics of subjects. Some of these findings were pursuant to Bond ( 2020 ), Turan and Akdag-Cimen ( 2020 ), and Zou et al.’s ( 2020 ) systematic review studies. Turan and Akdag-Cimen justify that flipped learning in EFL classrooms help learners to improve overall learning achievement, in particular speaking skills and peer interaction. In addition, Zou et al.’s results also support our outcome suggesting the most important interest in flipped learning studies was students’ academic performance. Second, the field was found to be interested in student engagement (see Bond 2020 for detail), motivation, and perceptions about the flipped learning approach (Gianoni-Capenakas et al. 2019 ; Zou et al. 2020 ). Six studies investigated the same outcomes in flipped learning as our study. In particular, in their research into academic performance, affective domain and cognitive domain, Zou et al. ( 2020 ) suggest that flipped learning has the greatest impact on engagement, a finding that concurs with ours. All in all, the results of our systematic review regarding the positive influence of flipped learning on soft skills and positive learning methods are a contribution to the field.

Furthermore, this study provides an integral overview of the body of research that has been produced since flipped learning was introduced. Students who come to class more prepared are more able to discuss what they have learnt and investigate topics of interest to them, which could increase their motivation to learn. Generation Z mostly learns using video channels as well as making videos, which could increase the appeal and efficiency of flipped learning. The results of the studies reviewed have also shown that visual aids, such as videos, help students to have an integral outlook as well as increase their commitment to the class and enhance their ability to transfer acquired knowledge to other topics.

Due to the increasing use of technology in every field, especially in education, teaching methods and techniques have changed. Furthermore, these changes have become more prevalent. Making learning more permanent and fun is a result of this evolving teaching philosophy. This unites researchers from different fields in searching for answers as to how learning can be made more permanent. For this purpose, the volume of research on the brain and learning has increased, and the findings of research in neuroscience have been employed in the field of education. The number of studies that focus on how permanent learning and academic success increase when the learner is more active in the learning process is on the rise. This study clearly shows that flipped learning, as an active learning pedagogy, is becoming prevalent in various fields and on various levels.

In conclusion, the trend in flipped learning studies suggests that this method is considerably effective. Flipped learning has played an important role in traditional educational methods giving way to non-traditional technology-based methods. Students find active learning pedagogy to be an effective method in the classroom. This method also positively effects students’ achievement, attitude, cognitive skills, and soft skills since they take more responsibility for their own learning.

The trend of the studies additionally shows that students are most frequently selected as a study group in the research. To make the flipped learning approach more effective, it is necessary to focus more on the challenges and experiences of the educators. Also, the effect of course videos is an important variable in the success of the flipped learning and success stems from their quality. Thus, more research should be conducted in this area. Additionally, as revealed in the literature, there were some drawbacks regarding flipped learning. More detailed research is required into these areas, in particular into the problems in the preparation of videos.

The effectiveness of flipped learning supports our findings and arguments that not only one or two flipped courses or flipped classrooms but whole flipped schools would be useful for new educational paradigm shifts. Especially in light of recent developments, the hybrid flexible (HyFlex) approach, which is a teaching and learning process that brings together face-to-face and online learning course formats, is poised to become more widespread in the near future.

Limitations and suggestions for further research

This is a document analysis study which mainly adopts a quantitative approach to the analysis of trends and outcomes of flipped learning research since 2012. The nature and type of publications before 2012 could also be investigated for a greater understanding into the evolution of the flipped learning approach. In addition, only articles accessed in full text were included in the analysis process. Moreover, the research did not include the terms “flipped classroom” and “inverted classroom” studies so the results of these studies were not compared and contrasted. The study was limited to the indexes selected for this study and research articles. Graduate theses were not included in the research. It could be beneficial for future studies to include all these different types of work.

We examined the studies circulated in five high-factor databases. This could be expanded by other indexes in future studies. Books written in the field of flipped learning, proceedings, presentation abstracts, and theses can also be included in the analysis. With the increase in the use of online education due to the onset of the pandemic in 2020, the studies before and after COVID-19 can be compared and the effectiveness of this comparison on flipped learning can be investigated in future studies.

In this study, Eurasia refers to Turkey, Cyprus, and Russia.

We decided to categorize collaborative skills under the affective domain instead of soft skills because they are the skills which would be intentionally used as an instructional purpose.

Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126 (1), 334–345.

Article   Google Scholar  

Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128 (1), 269–283.

Bakla, A. (2018). Learner-generated materials in a flipped pronunciation class: Asequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Computers & Education, 125 (1), 14–38.

Barkley, E. (2009). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Google Scholar  

Bergmann, J. (2018). “It’s time to reach every student.” Retrieved from http://flglobal.org/trainingservices/ .

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day . Eugene: ISTE: International Society for Technology in Education.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement . Eugene: ISTE: International Society for Technology in Education.

Bhagat, K. K., Chang, C. N., & Chang, C. Y. (2016). The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school. Educational Technology & Society, 19 (3), 134–142.

Birgili, B., Seggie, F. N., & Kızıltepe, Z. (2019). Investigating the relationship between volitional strategies and academic achievement in a flipped learning environment. Croatian Journal of Education , 21 (1), 345–375. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v21i1.3006 .

Bloom, B. (1968). Learning for mastery: Instruction and curriculum . Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

Bloom, B. S. (Ed.), Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals . Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

Bognar, B., Sablic, M., & Skugor, A. (2018). Flipped learning and online discussion in higher education teaching. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Didactics of smart pedagogy (pp. 371–392). Cham: Springer Nature.

Bond, M. (2020). Facilitating student engagement through the flipped learning approach in K-12: A systematic review. Computers & Education . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103819 .

Brame, C. J. (2016). Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15 (4), 1–6.

Bristol, T. J. (2014). Flipping the classroom. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 9, 43–46.

Brown, B. A. (2016). Understanding the flipped classroom: Types, uses and reactions to a modern and evolving pedagogy. Culminating Projects in Teacher Development, 12 . Retrieved from https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/ed_etds/12 .

Çakıroğlu, Ü., & Öztürk, M. (2017). Flipped classroom with problem-based activities: Exploring self-regulated learning in a programming language course. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (1), 337–349.

Caligaris, M., Rodrígueza, G., & Laugeroa, L. (2016). A first experience of flipped classroom in numerical analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217 (1), 838–845.

Canaleta, X., Vernet, D., Vicent, L., & Montero, J. A. (2014). Master in teacher training: A real implementation of active learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31 (1), 651–658.

Chan, C. K. Y., Fong, E. T. Y., Luk, L. Y. Y., & Ho, R. (2017, November). A review of literature on challenges in the development and implementation of generic competencies in higher education curriculum. International Journal of Educational Development, 57 (1), 1–10.

Chang, S.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. (2018). Impacts of an augmented reality-based flipped learning guiding approach on students’ scientific project performance and perceptions. Computers & Education, 125 (1), 226–239.

Chao, C. Y., Chen, Y. T., & Chuang, K. Y. (2015). Exploring students’ learning attitude and achievement in flipped learning supported computer aided design curriculum: A study in high school engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 23 (4), 514–526.

Chi, M. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1 (1), 73–105.

Chivata, Y. P., & Oviedo, R. C. (2018). EFL students’ perceptions of activeness during the implementation of flipped learning approach at a Colombian university. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, 17 (1), 81–105.

Choi, J., & Lee, Y. (2018). To what extent does “flipping” make lessons effective in a multimedia production class? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55 (1), 3–12.

Christiansen, M. A., Nadelson, L., Etchberger, L. K., Cuch, M. M., Kingsford, T. A., & Woodward, L. O. (2017). Flipped learning in synchronously-delivered, geographically-dispersed general chemistry classrooms. Chemistry and Biochemistry Faculty Publications . https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00763 .

Chyr, W.-L., Shen, P.-D., Chiang, Y.-C., Lin, J.-B., & Tsai, C.-W. (2018). Exploring the effects of online academic help-seeking and flipped learning on improving students’ learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20 (3), 11–23.

Clarivate Analytics. (2020). Journal Citation Reports . Retrieved from https://jcr.clarivate.com/JCRLandingPageAction.action .

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Crouch, C., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69 (1), 970–977.

Çukurbaşı, B., & Kıyıcı, M. (2018). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretimde internet teknolojilerini kullanmaya yönelik tercihlerindeki değişimin incelenmesi [An analysis on the change in preferences of preservice teachers towards use of the internet technologies in teaching]. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26 (3), 765–776.

Davis, L., Neary, M. A., & Vaughn, S. E. (2013). Teaching advanced legal research in a flipped classroom.  Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing,   22 (1), 13–19.

Dehghanzadeh, S., & Jafaraghaee, F. (2018). Comparing the effects of traditional lecture and flipped classroom on nursing students’ critical thinking disposition: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Education Today, 71, 151–156.

Deng, L. (2018). The project-based flipped learning model in business English translation course: Learning, teaching and assessment. English Language Teaching, 11 (9), 118–128.

Fadol, Y., Aldamen, H., & Saadullah, S. (2018). A comparative analysis of flipped, online and traditional teaching: A case of female Middle Eastern management students. The International Journal of Management Education, 16 (1), 266–280.

Fell-Kurban, C. (2019). Designing effective, contemporary assessment on a flipped educational sciences course. Interactive Learning Environments, 27 (8), 1143–1159.

Fidalgo-Blanco, A., Martinez-Nuñez, M., Borrás-Gene, O., & Sanchez-Medina, J. J. (2017). Micro flip teaching—An innovative model to promote the active involvement of students. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 713–723.

Gianoni-Capenakas, S., Lagravere, M., Pacheco-Pereira, C., & Yacyshyn, J. (2019). Effectiveness and perceptions of flipped learning model in dental education: A systematic review. Journal of Dental Education, 83 (8), 935–945. https://doi.org/10.21815/JDE.019.109 .

Gomez-Tejedor, J. A., Vidaurre, A., Tort-Ausina, I., Molina-Mateo, J., Serrano, M.-A., Meseguer-Duenas, J. M., et al. (2020). Effectiveness of flip teaching on engineering students’ performance in the physics lab. Computers & Education . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103708 .

Gostelow, N., Barber, J., Gishen, F., & Berlin, A. (2018). Flipping social determinants on its head: Medical student perspectives on the flipped classroom and simulated patients to teach social determinants of health. Medical Teacher, 40 (7), 728–735.

Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013, June). A review of flipped learning. Retrieved from http://www.flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/41/LitReview_FlippedLearning.pdf .

Hao, Y. (2016). Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 59 (1), 82–92.

Hao, Y., & Lee, K. S. (2016). Teaching in flipped classrooms: Exploring pre-service teachers’ concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 250–260.

Harrison, D. J., Saito, L., Markee, N., & Herzog, S. (2016). Assessing the effectiveness of a hybrid-flipped model of learning on fluid mechanics instruction: Overall course performance, homework, and far- and near-transfer of learning. European Journal of Engineering Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1218826 .

He, W., Holton, A. J., & Farkas, G. (2018). Impact of partially flipped instruction on immediate and subsequent course performance in a large undergraduate chemistry course. Computers & Education, 125, 120–131.

Heo, H. J., & Chun, B. A. (2018). Improving the higher order thinking skills using flipped learning: Focused on the in-class activities with problem posing and solving. Asia Life Sciences Supplement, 15 (4), 2187–2199.

Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2018). Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: A meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education, 18 (38), 1–12.

Hew, K. F., Zhu, Y., & Lo, C. K. (2018). Designing and evaluating postgraduate courses based on a 5e-flipped classroom model: A two-case mixed-method study. In S. Cheung, J. Lam, K. Li, O. Au, W. Ma, & W. Ho (Eds.), Technology in education: Innovative solutions and practices, ICTE 2018. Communications in computer and information science , 843. Singapore: Springer.

Hewitt, L. (2017). Timing is flipping everything: A case study in Law that suggests student engagement depends on when the Flipped Classroom is introduced. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 10 (1), 1–8.

Hu, C.-F., & Hsu, F.-F. (2018). The value of adding a flipped learning component to a humanities course in higher education: Student perception and performance. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 15 (2), 1–32.

Hung, Y.-H. (2019). To teach or not teach controversial public issues in Taiwan? Asia Pacific Journal of Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2019.1671807 .

Hwang, G.-J., & Lai, C.-L. (2017). Facilitating and bridging out-of-class and in-class learning: An interactive e-book-based flipped learning approach for math courses. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (1), 184–197.

Hwang, G.-J., Lai, C.-L., & Wang, S.-Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computer Education, 2 (4), 449–473.

Flipped Learning Global Initiative [FLGI]. (2018a). Available from http://flglobal.org .

Flipped Learning Global Initiative [FLGI]. (2018b). The five qualities of world-class flipped learning practitioners. Retrieved from http://flglobal.org/five-qualities-of-world-class-flipped-learning/ .

Jang, S., & Kim, N. (2004). Transition from high school to higher education and work in Korea, from the competency-based education perspective. International Journal of Educational Development, 24 (6), 691–703.

Jarvis, W., Halvorson, W., Sadeque, S., & Johnston, S. (2014). A large class engagement (lce) model based on service-dominant logic (sdl) and flipped classrooms. Education Research & Perspectives, 41, 1–24.

Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N., & Jahren, C. T. (2018). A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49 (3), 398–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12548 .

Karariga, I.-R., & Knox, B. (2012, July). Flipped classroom for professional development . Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN), Barcelona, Spain.

Kardaş, F., & Yeşilyaprak, B. (2015). A current approach to education: Flipped learning model. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 48 (2), 103–121.

Kim, H. S., Kim, M. Y., Cho, M.-K., & Jang, S. J. (2017). Effectiveness of applying flipped learning to clinical nursing practicums for nursing students in Korea: A randomized controlled trial. International of Journal Nursing Practice, 23 (1), 1–10.

Koohang, A., Riley, L., Smith, T., & Schreurs, J. (2009). E-learning and constructivism: From theory to application. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning Objects, 5 (1), 91–109.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 212–264.

Låg, T., & Sæle, R. G. (2019, July-September). Does the flipped classroom improve student learning and satisfaction? A systematic review and meta-analysis. AERA Open, 5 (3), 1–17.

Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31 (1), 30–43.

Flipped Learning 3.0 Global Standards Summit. (2018). Available from http://aalasinternational.org/flipped-learning-global-standards-summit/ .

Lee, G., & Wallace, A. (2018). Flipped learning in the English as a foreign language classroom: Outcomes and perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 52, 62–84.

Lin, H.-C., Hwang, G.-J., & Hsu, Y.-D. (2019). Effects of ASQ-based flipped learning on nurse practitioner learners’ nursing skills, learning achievement and learning perceptions. Computers & Education, 139 (1), 207–221.

Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017). A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: Possible solutions and recommendations for future research. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12 (4), 1–22.

Long, T., Cummins, J., & Waugh, M. (2017). Use of the flipped classroom instructional model in higher education: Instructors’ perspectives. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29 (2), 179–200.

Lopes, A. P., & Soares, F. (2018). Perception and performance in a flipped financial mathematics classroom. The International Journal of Management Education, 16 (1), 105–113.

Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

McCarthy, J. (2016). Reflections on a flipped classroom in first year higher education. Issues in Educational Research, 26 (2), 332–350.

MEF University. (2015, October). MEF flipped learning course design policy . Center for Research and Best Practices in Learning and Teaching (CELT), Istanbul, Turkey.

Mennella, T. A. (2016). Comparing the efficacy of flipped vs. alternative active learning in a college genetics course. The American Biology Teacher, 78 (6), 471–479.

Merlin-Knoblich, C., & Camp, A. (2018). A case study exploring students’ experiences in a flipped counselling course. Counselor Education & Supervision, 57, 301–316.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Molnar, K. K. (2017). What effect does flipping the classroom have on undergraduate student perceptions and grades? Education and Information Technologies, 22 (1), 2741–2765.

Murphy, J., Chang, J. M., & Suaray, K. (2016). Student performance and attitudes in a collaborative and flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47 (5), 653–673.

Murray, D., McGill, T., Thompson, N., & Toohey, D. (2017). Can learners become teachers? Evaluating the merits of student generated content and peer assessment. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology Education, 14, 21–33.

Namaziandost, E., & Çakmak, F. (2020). An account of EFL learners’ self-efficacy and gender in the Flipped Classroom Model. Education and Information Technologies . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10167-7 .

Narendran, R., Almeida, S., Coombes, R., Hardie, G., Quintana-Smark, E., Zaher, N., et al. (2018). The role of self- determination theory in developing curriculum for flipped classroom learning: A case study of first-year business undergraduate course. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 15 (5), 1–20.

Nielsen, L. (2011). Five Reasons I'm Not Flipping over the Flipped Classroom. Technology & Learning, Retrieved from https://www.techlearning.com/tl-advisor-blog/3360 .

Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning—A cultural change needed in teacher education and in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18 (1), 763–780.

Niemi, H., Nevgi, A., & Aksit, F. (2016). Active learning promoting student teachers’ professional competences in Finland and Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education , 39 (4), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1212835 .

Niemi, H., & Nevgi, A. (2014). Research studies and active learning promoting professional competences in Finnish teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43 (1), 131–142.

O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25 (1), 85–95.

Oh, J., Kim, S. J., Kim, S., & Vasuki, R. (2017). Evaluation of the effects of flipped learning of a nursing informatics course. Journal of Nursing Education, 56 (8), 477–483.

Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 5 (6), 66–70.

Pardo A., & Mirriahi, N. (2017). Design, deployment and evaluation of a Flipped learning first-year engineering course. In C. Reidsema, L. Kavanagh, R. Hadgraft, & N. Smith (Eds.), (pp. 177–191). The Flipped classroom . Singapore: Springer.

Park, E. O., & Park, J. H. (2018). Quasi-experimental study on the effectiveness of a flipped classroom for teaching adult health nursing. Japan Journal of Nursing Science, 15 (2), 125–134.

Parslow, G. R. (2012). Commentary: The Khan academy and the day-night flipped classroom. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 40 (5), 337–338.

Pintrich, P. R., & McKeachie, W. J. (2000). A framework for conceptualizing student motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. In P. R. Pintrich & P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Conative constructions and self-regulated learning (pp. 31–50). Hameenlinna: RCVE.

Ponikwer, E., & Patel, B. A. (2018). Implementation and evaluation of flipped learning for delivery of analytical chemistry topics. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 410, 2263–2269.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3), 223–231.

Prince, M., & Vigeant, M. (2006). Using inquiry-based activities to promote understanding of critical engineering concepts. In ASEE Conference, Chicago, IL.

Quarato, S. (2016). Is the flipped classroom pedagogy effective for all students? Unpublished certificate of advanced study thesis, Sacred Heart University, Fairfield, CT. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/edl/9/ .

Reidsema, C., Kavanagh, L., Hadgraft, R., & Smith, N. (2017). The flipped classroom: Practice and practices in higher education . Singapore: Springer Nature.

Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17 (1), 74–84.

Rodriguez, R. E. (2015). A massively flipped class: Designing and implementing active learning information literacy instruction for a large enrolment course. Reference Services Review, 44 (1), 4–20.

Rodriguez, M., Diaz, I., Gonzalez, E. J., & González-Miquel, M. (2018). Motivational active learning: An integrated approach to teaching and learning process control. Education for Chemical Engineers, 24 (1), 7–12.

Şahin, M., & Fell-Kurban, K. (2016). The flipped approach to higher education: Designing universities for today’s knowledge economies and societies . Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

Şahin, M., & Fell-Kurban, K. (2019). The new university model: Flipped, adaptive, digital and active Learning (FADAL) . Houston: FL Global Publishing.

Salem, A. A. M. S. (2018). Engaging ESP university students in flipped classrooms for developing functional writing skills, hots, and eliminating writer’s block. English Language Teaching, 11 (12), 177–198.

Sams, A. (2011). The flipped classroom . Paper presented at the Conference 242nd National Meeting of the American-Chemical-Society (ACS), Denver, CO.

Sams, A., & Bergmann, J. (2013). Flip your students’ learning. Educational Leadership, 70 (6), 16–20.

Sargent, J., & Casey, A. (2020). Flipped learning, pedagogy and digital technology: Establishing consistent practice to optimise lesson time. European Physical Education Review, 26 (1), 70–84.

Shi, Y., Ma, Y., MacLeod, J., & Yang, H. H. (2020). College students’ cognitive learning outcomes in flipped classroom instruction: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Journal of Computers in Education, 7 (1), 79–103.

Shyr, W.-J., & Chen, C.-H. (2018). Designing a technology-enhanced flipped learning system to facilitate students’ self-regulation and performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34, 53–62.

Silberman, M. (1996).  Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject . Prentice-Hall, PO Box 11071, Des Moines, IA 50336-1071.

Sletten, S. R. (2017). Investigating flipped learning: Student self-regulated learning, perceptions, and achievement in an introductory biology course. Journal of Science and Educational Technology, 26 (1), 347–358.

Sun, F.-R., Hu, H.-Z., Wan, R.-G., Fu, X., & Wu, S.-J. (2019). A learning analytics approach to investigating pre-service teachers’ change of concept of engagement in the flipped classroom. Interactive Learning Environments . https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1660996 .

Talbert, R. (2012, June). Learning matlab in the inverted classroom . Paper presented at the ASEE Annual Conference, San Antonio.

Talbert, R. (2017). How much research has been done on flipped learning? An update for mid-2017. Retrieved from http://rtalbert.org/how-much-research-update/ .

Telford, M., & Senior, E. (2017). Healthcare students’ experiences when integrating e-learning and flipped classroom instructional approaches. British Journal of Nursing, 26 (11), 617–622.

Thompson, P. (2013). Learner-centred education and ‘cultural translation.’ International Journal of Educational Development, 33 (1), 48–58.

Thoms, C. L. V. (2012, November). Enhancing the blended learning curriculum by using the "flipped classroom" approach to produce a dynamic learning environment . Paper presented at the 5th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI), Madrid, Spain.

Thongkoo, K., Panjaburee, P., & Daungcharone, K. (2019). A development of ubiquitous learning support system based on an enhanced inquiry-based learning approach. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 13 (2), 129–151.

Thongkoo, K., Panjaburee, P., & Daungcharone, K. (2019). Integrating inquiry learning and knowledge management into a flipped classroom to improve students’ web programming performance in higher education. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 11 (3), 304–324.

Trust, T., Maloy, R. W., & Edwards, S. (2018). Learning through making: Emerging and expanding designs for college classes. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 62 (1), 19–28.

Tsai, C., Shen, P., Chiang, Y., & Lin, C. (2017). How to solve students’ problems in a flipped classroom: A quasi-experimental approach. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16, 225–233.

Tucker, B. (2012). The flipped classroom: Online instruction at home frees class time for learning. Education Next, 12 (1). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/the‐flipped‐classroom/ .

Turan, Z., & Akdag-Cimen, B. (2020). Flipped classroom in English language teaching: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33 (5–6), 590–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1584117 .

Van Ments, M. (1999). The effective use of role-play: Practical techniques for improving learning . London: Kogan Page.

Voronina, M. V., Moroz, O. N., Sudarikov, A. E., Rakhimzhanova, M. B., & Muratbakeev, E. K. (2017). Systematic review and results of the experiment of a flipped learning model for the courses of descriptive geometry, engineering and computer graphics, computer geometry. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13 (8), 4831–4845. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00967a .

White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modelling and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16 (1), 3–118.

Winter, J. W. (2018). Analysis of knowledge construction during group space activities in a flipped learning course. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34, 720–730.

Wu, W.-C.V., Hsieh, J. S. C., & Yang, J. C. (2017). Creating an online learning community in a flipped classroom to enhance EFL learners’ oral proficiency. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (2), 142–157.

Yildiz-Durak, H. (2018). Flipped learning readiness in teaching programming in middle schools: Modelling its relation to various variables. Journal Computer Assisted Learning, 34 (1), 939–959.

Zainuddin, Z., & Halili, S. H. (2016). Flipped classroom research and trends from different fields of study. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17 (3), 313–340.

Zainuddin, Z., Haruna, H., Li, X., Zhang, Y., & Chu, S. K. W. (2019a). A systematic review of flipped classroom empirical evidence from different fields: What are the gaps and future trends? On the Horizon . https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-09-2018-0027 .

Zainuddin, Z., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Chu, S. K. W., Idris, S., & Keumala, C. M. (2019b). Research trends in flipped classroom empirical evidence from 2017 to 2018: A content analysis. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16 (3), 255–277.

Zeybek, G. (2020). Flipped learning. In Ş Orakcı (Ed.), Paradigm shifts in 21st century teaching and learning (pp. 158–180). Hershey: IGI Global.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Zhan, Y., So, W. W. M., & Cheng, I. N. Y. (2017). Students’ beliefs and experiences of interdisciplinary learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 37 (3), 375–388.

Zhonggen, Y., & Liheng, Y. (2017). Correlations between learners’ initial EFL proficiency and variables of clicker-aided flipped EFL class. Education and Information Technologies, 22 (4), 1587–1603.

Zou, D. (2020). Gamified flipped EFL classroom for primary education: Student and teacher perceptions. Journal of Computers in Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00153-w .

Zou, D., Luo, S., Xie, H., & Hwang, G. J. (2020). A systematic review of research on flipped language classrooms: Theoretical foundations, learning activities, tools, research topics and findings. Computer Assisted Language Learning . https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839502 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank İsmail Elçiçek and Kübra Demirörs for their assistance during the data collection.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Mathematics and Science Education, MEF University, Istanbul, Turkey

Bengi Birgili

Department of Educational Sciences, Boğazici University, Istanbul, Turkey

Fatma Nevra Seggie

Department of Educational Sciences, Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, Istanbul, Turkey

MEF University, Huzur mah, Maslak Ayazağa cad. No:4, 34396, Maslak-Sarıyer/Istanbul, Turkey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bengi Birgili .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Birgili, B., Seggie, F.N. & Oğuz, E. The trends and outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018: A descriptive content analysis. J. Comput. Educ. 8 , 365–394 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00183-y

Download citation

Received : 29 April 2020

Revised : 11 January 2021

Accepted : 19 January 2021

Published : 09 February 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00183-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Active learning
• Descriptive content analysis
• Flipped learning
• Student performance
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 24 August 2016

The flipped classroom: for active, effective and increased learning – especially for low achievers

• Jalal Nouri 1  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  13 , Article number:  33 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

113k Accesses

155 Citations

43 Altmetric

Metrics details

Higher education has been pressured to shift towards more flexible, effective, active, and student-centered teaching strategies that mitigate the limitations of traditional transmittal models of education. Lately, the flipped classroom model has been suggested to support this transition. However, research on the use of flipped classroom in higher education is in its infancy and little is known about student’s perceptions of learning through flipped classroom. This study examined students’ perceptions of flipped classroom education in a last year university course in research methods. A questionnaire was administered measuring students’ ( n  = 240) perceptions of flipped classroom in general, video as a learning tool, and Moodle (Learning Management System) as a supporting tool within the frame of a flipped classroom model. The results revealed that a large majority of the students had a positive attitude towards flipped classroom, the use of video and Moodle, and that a positive attitude towards flipped classroom was strongly correlated to perceptions of increased motivation, engagement, increased learning, and effective learning. Low achievers significantly reported more positively as compared to high achievers with regards to attitudes towards the use of video as a learning tool, perceived increased learning, and perceived more effective learning.

Introduction

Teaching at the university level has been performed in a relatively similar manner during a long historical time and across cultures. As a central pillar, we find the traditional lecture with the professor, or the “sage on the stage” as put by King ( 1993 ), transmitting knowledge to receiving students. Nevertheless, over the past 30 years, university education and traditional lectures in particular have been strongly criticized. The main criticism has cast light on the following: students are passive in traditional lectures due to the lack of mechanisms that ensure intellectual engagement with the material, student’s attention wanes quickly, the pace of the lectures is not adapted to all learners needs and traditional lectures are not suited for teaching higher order skills such such as application and analysis (Cashin, 1985 ; Bonwell, 1996 ; Huxham, 2005 ; Young, Robinson, & Alberts, 2009 ). Consequently, various researchers and educators have advocated forms of lecturing based on an active learning philosophy, some involving novel technology mediated interactions (Beekes, 2006 ; Rosie, 2000 ), others without an explicit focus on technology such as the enhanced lecture of Bonwell ( 1996 ). However, despite the comprehensive critique, the traditional lecture continues to prevail as the predominant didactic strategy in higher education (Roehl, Reddy, & Shannon, 2013 ).

It is against such a background, and to high extent because of advancements in educational technology, increasing pressures on higher education have been witnessed that have spawned a push to flexible blended student-centered learning strategies that mitigate the limitations of the transmittal model of education (Betihavas, Bridgman, Kornhaber, & Cross, 2015 ). Accompanied with the shift to provide student-centered learning we have seen a surge of researchers and educators advocating flipped classroom curricula in higher education. The advocacy of the flipped classroom model is justifiable. Judging by its underlying theory and the conducted empirical studies, the flipped classroom model appears to address several challenges with traditional ways of lecturing and pave way for active learning strategies and for using classroom time for engaging in higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002 ) such as application, analysis, and synthesis.

The flipped classroom model is based on the idea that traditional teaching is inverted in the sense that what is normally done in class is flipped or switched with that which is normally done by the students out of class. Thus, instead of students listening to a lecture in class and then going home to work on a set of assigned problems, they read course literature and assimilate lecture material through video at home and engage in teacher-guided problem-solving, analysis and discussions in class. Proponents of flipped classroom list numerous advantages of inverting teaching and learning in higher education according to the flipped classroom model: it allows students to learn in their own pace, it encourages students to actively engage with lecture material, it frees up actual class time for more effective, creative and active learning activities, teachers receive expanded opportunities to interact with and to assess students’ learning, and students take control and responsibility for their learning (Gilboy, Heinerichs, & Pazzaglia, 2015 ; Betihavas et al., 2015 ).

Despite that flipped classroom is a rather new phenomenon in higher education, some empirical research has been conducted. For instance, McLaughlin et al. ( 2013 ) and McLaughlin et al. ( 2014 ) analysis of pharmacy students’ experiences of flipped classroom courses revealed that students prefer learning content prior to class and using class time for applied learning, and that students who learned through a flipped classroom approach considered themselves more engaged than students attending traditional courses. Similar findings were obtained by Davies, Dean, and Ball ( 2013 ) who compared three different instructional strategies in an information systems spreadsheet course, and showed that students attending the flipped classroom course also were more satisfied with the learning environment compared to the other treatment groups. Several studies report that students enjoy being able to learn in their own pace and that they prefer flipped classroom over traditional approaches (Butt, 2014 ; Davies et al., 2013 ; Larson & Yamamoto, 2013 ; McLaughlin et al., 2014 ; Roach, 2014 ; Gilboy et al., 2015 ). In term of examinations of learning outcomes, Love, Hodge, Grandgenett, and Swift ( 2014 ) demonstrated higher exam grades for students using a flipped classroom approach as compared to students learning through traditional methods. Hung ( 2015 ) showed similar results for English language learners. Another study by Findlay-Thompson and Mombourquette ( 2014 ) comparing traditional teaching methods and the flipped classroom approach within the same business course showed no significant differences in academic outcomes.

However, empirical research on the flipped classroom model in higher education, and more detailed investigations of students’ perceptions of its use, is in its infancy and the need for further research is underlined by many (Bishop & Verleger, 2013 ; Uzunboylu & Karagozlu, 2015 ; Betihavas et al., 2015 ; Gilboy et al., 2015 ).

Research purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine how students perceive flipped classroom education in a university research methods course. Three particular aspects were considered, namely, (a) the student’s general experiences and attitudes of learning through flipped classroom, (b) the student’s experiences of using video lectures as a medium for learning, and (c) the student’s experiences of using a Learning Management System (LMS) in the frame of the flipped classroom model. Further, this study has also considered differences in experiences and attitudes of low and high achieving students.

This study is based on a quantitative analysis of a closed questionnaire addressing undergraduate students’ perceptions and experience of learning through flipped classroom in a course preparing students for the bachelor thesis with respect to scientific methodology and communication. The course was implemented during autumn 2015.

Participants

The participants were undergraduate students ( n  = 240) at Stockholm University in Sweden taking the last year course Research methods and communication during autumn semester 2015. All of the students were enrolled in 8 different bachelor level programs at the department of Computer and Systems Sciences. The students, 76 females and 164 males, ranged in age from 20 to 43 years, with a mean age of 25.12 years (SD = 4.09). Out of the 240 students only 23 had a previous experience of flipped classroom. The number of students passing the course was 218. Table  1 presents an overview of student demographics and background questions. Low and high achievers among the students were determined by the student’s average grade during their studies. Here high achievers were defined as having average grades A to B while low achievers were defined as having average grades C to F.

Materials and procedure

Course structure.

The course focused on in this study prepares students for the bachelor thesis with respect to scientific methodology and communication. The learning objectives are on the one hand to facilitate students understanding of the fundamentals of research strategies, data-collection methods, and analysis methods, and on the other hand to familiarize students with application of qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. Put differently, the course aimed at equipping students with conceptual knowledge (an understanding of scientific methods), and procedural knowledge (application of analysis methods and scientific writing). See Fig.  1 for the underlying pedagogical structure.

Pedagogical structure for students conceptual and procedural learning

The course was divided into three parts with three different examination tasks. The first part concerned gaining a theoretical understanding of the fundamentals of research strategies, data-collection methods, and analysis methods. The pedagogical structure for this part comprised of independent reading of course literature. Students reading of the course literature was supported by three longer video lectures (in average 60 min each), one traditional campus lecture (teacher presenting and summarizing the fundamentals of research strategies), and one interactive flipped classroom lecture in which the teacher presented examples of exam questions that students answered in real-time by using a digital response system (Socrative) via their own smart phones, tablets and computers. The response system provided an overview of the responses that allowed students to assess their knowledge and the teacher to provide formative feedback and elaborated explanations when needed. In addition, digital supervision was offered through a learning management system (Moodle). The examination for this part comprised of a multiple-choice digital exam in the learning management system.

The second part was a practical qualitative analysis project that students conducted in groups of two. The task of this project was to use a qualitative analysis method to analyze qualitative interview data and communicate the results in a report following scientific standards of qualitative data presentation. During this project the students were supported by five digital lectures (in average 35 min each), three flipped lectures on campus, and digital supervision through the learning management system. In the three flipped lectures on campus students worked with their projects and were scaffolded by several teachers that answered questions and provided feedback. When the teachers identified common misunderstandings or needs among the students, they provided elaborated explanations to the whole class. The examination of the second part comprised of a written group report.

The third part of the course was similar to the second part, comprising of a project with a focus on using quantitative methods to analyze a questionnaire and communicate the results according to scientific standards of quantitative result presentation. During this project the students were supported by seven video lectures (in average 30 min each), three flipped lectures in class with teachers scaffolding practical work, and digital supervision in the learning management system. The videos covered the theoretical fundamentals of descriptive and inferential statistics as well as how different statistical tests can be performed and interpreted in SPSS. The examination of the third part comprised of a written group report.

All video lectures made available to the students during the course were produced by teachers and researchers in a professional video studio at Stockholm University. The video lectures were specifically tailored for the course.

Survey measures and procedure

A questionnaire was developed consisting of 4 sections with 58 items to measure students’ perceptions of flipped classroom in general, video as a learning tool, and Moodle as a supporting system.

Section 1 (General information) consisted of 12 demographic and background items

Section 2 (Flipped Classroom Scale) consisted of 21 items measuring students’ experiences and attitudes of learning through flipped classroom

Section 3 (Video Scale) consisted of 16 items measuring students’ experiences of using video lectures as a medium for learning.

Section 4 (LMS scale) consisted of 9 items measuring students’ perceptions of the utility of Moodle in supporting their learning processes within the frame of flipped classroom pedagogy.

An exploratory factor analysis with principal component extraction was performed in an attempt to refine the instrument. After factor analysis, 8 items that did not load on any factors or highly cross-loaded on multiple factors were removed. Accordingly, the instrument used for the final analysis consisted of 17 items for the Flipped Classroom Scale, 13 items for the Video Scale, and 5 items for the LMS Scale. Overall, Cronbach’s alphas were .78 for the Flipped Classroom Scale, .82 for the Video Scale, and .84 for the LMS Scale. Students were asked to complete the questionnaire at the end of the course. The questionnaire was developed and administered through a web tool.

Students’ general perceptions of flipped classroom

The flipped classroom model proved to be appreciated by many students. Among the 240 respondents, 180 students expressed a positive attitude to flipped classroom after the course (75 %). The students most appreciated the use of video (M = 4.15, SD = 1.10), flexibility and mobility given by the flipped classroom model (M = 3.95, SD = 1.10), that learning can be done at own pace (M = 3.75, SD = 0.91), that learning processes are better supported (M = 3.54, SD = 1.13), and that non-traditional campus activities are meaningful (M = 3.40, SD = 1.13).

In terms of other characteristics of the learning process, to some extent the students appeared to agree that it is easier and more effective to learn with the flipped classroom approach (M = 3.17, SD = 1.03) and that they feel more motivated as learners (M = 2.95, SD = 1.13). Furthermore, many students perceived that they had to take more responsibility for their learning (M = 3.91, SD = 0.96) in a flipped classroom course.

Noteworthy, some students also felt themselves alone during their learning (M = 3.01, SD = 1.29). Table  2 shows the students’ experiences of flipped classroom after the course was completed.

The results of an analysis of the correlations between the measured variables, with a particular focus on attitudes towards flipped classroom and its effect on learning and motivation is presented in Table  3 . Students with positive attitudes towards flipped classroom more likely had positive attitudes towards video ( p  < 0.01), experienced increased motivation ( p  < 0.01), more effective learning ( p  < 0.01), and increased learning ( p  < 0.01). They also tended to agree that flipped classroom made them more active as learners ( p  < 0.01) and take more responsibility for their learning ( p  < 0.01).

The use of video as a learning tool

Using flipped classroom and in particular video as a tool for assimilating knowledge otherwise presented in traditional lectures proved to correlate strongly with perceived increased motivation, increased learning and effective learning. When analyzing the student’s experiences of using video as a learning tool in more detail a number of reasons for appreciating video stand out (see Table  4 for an overview). The students strongly agreed that it was useful for their learning to be able to pause (M = 4.52, SD = 0.85), rewind (M = 4.48, SD = 0.87) and fast-forward video (M = 4.04, SD = 1.36). They also agreed that the combination of video and non-traditional lectures was useful (M = 3.73, SD = 1.16) as well as being able to watch lectures in a mobile way (MD = 3.98, SD = 1.28).

The use of Moodle within the frame of flipped classroom

A learning management system (Moodle) was used during the course to support students’ learning processes within the frame of a flipped classroom model. As presented in Table  5 , the students appreciated this support (M = 4.22, SD = 0.86). In particular, they found it useful to be able to see other students’ questions posed in Moodle and the teachers answers to those questions (M = 4.39, SD = 0.94), and for general communication with teachers (M = 4.07, SD = 1.05). Interestingly, the LMS itself contributed to some student’s motivation to learn (M = 3.40, SD = 1.26).

Comparing low and high achievers

When comparing low and high achievers among the students in terms of attitudes towards flipped classroom, video and the effect on learning and motivation some interesting findings were obtained. The results of conducted independent sample t-tests showed no significant differences in positive attitudes to flipped classroom of low achievers (M = 3.37, SD = 0.74) and high achievers (M = 3.20, SD = 0.87), t(238) = 2.13, p  > 0.05. Significant differences were however revealed with regards to attitudes towards the use of video of low achievers (M = 3.10, SD = 0.72) and high achievers (M = 2.67, SD = 1.02), t(238) = 3.17, p  < 0.05.

Interestingly, the perception of increased learning also significantly differed between low achievers (M = 3.13, SD = 0.93) and high achievers (M = 2.71, SD = 1.23), t(238) = 2.40, p  < 0.05. The tests likewise showed significant differences in perceived more effective learning of low achievers (M = 3.25, SD = 0.95) and high achievers (M = 2.80, SD = 1.32), t(238) = 2.46, p  < 0.05. However, no significant differences could be identified between low achievers and high achievers in the other variables measured (see Table  6 ).

Conclusions

The calls for reforming traditional higher education teaching, and for transforming the sage on the stage into the guide on the side in order to pave way for student-centered active learning strategies have probably never been as loud as now. In this context, flipped classroom has been proposed to answer these calls. Several studies have demonstrated that flipped classroom as a teaching method may promote student engagement and a more active approach to learning in higher education. The findings from this study confirm the results of these studies and highlights additional advantages associated with the flipped classroom model.

The students in the study’s sample were found to generally appreciate the flipped classroom. The most commonly valued reasons for this was that the students appreciated learning through using video material, the opportunity to study in their own pace, flexibility and mobility brought about by accessible video lectures, and that learning is easier and more effective within the frame of the flipped classroom.

A correlation analysis further demonstrated significant strong correlations between students’ appreciation of the flipped classroom experience on the one hand, and attitudes towards video as a learning tool, increased motivation, increased learning, more effective learning and more active learning on the other hand.

Interestingly, independent sample t-tests showed significant differences between low and high achievers in that the low achievers tended to have more positive attitudes towards the use of video as a learning tool. Low achievers also to higher extent perceived increased and more effective learning through flipped classroom. A more detailed analysis of the students’ experiences of using video showed that the most valued aspects of video use was being able to pause and rewind the video lectures. Against this fact, it is not unreasonable to conclude that low achievers, who might find traditional lectures challenging and fast-paced (Young et al., 2009 ), experienced an empowerment using the flipped classroom model in terms of gaining more opportunities to reflect and learn in their own pace.

For all students in general, the results indicate that the reasons for students’ perceptions of increased and more effective learning are associated with: 1) the affordances of video lectures (the ability to reflect and learn in own pace); 2) more meaningful practice-oriented and teacher supervised classroom activities; and 3) more supported learning processes due to teacher and peer scaffolding in class and out of class through the use of Moodle.

Thus, as final remarks, considering the ineffectiveness of traditional lectures in retaining students’ attention and promoting active learning (Windschitl, 1999 ; Young et al., 2009 ) in higher education, the results of this study indicate that the flipped classroom model seem to offer promising ways to engage students in more effective, supportive, motivating and active learning, especially for low achievers and students that may struggle with traditional lectures. However, the results should be viewed in light of the limitations of this study. One such limitation is the non existence of a control group which limits the external validity of the results. Another limitation is connected to the fact that the majority of the student’s surveyed have not experienced flipped classroom before, thus the results may partly reflect the influence of a new approach of learning and teaching and not necessary the influence of the flipped classroom approach. It also should be noted that all results related to improved learning and effectiveness of learning is based on students self-declared perceptions and not on independent measures. Future studies on the effects of flipped classroom should address these limitations and in particular explore the extent to which the actual performance of students is or is not affected by the flipped classroom approach moving beyond just student perceptions.

Beekes, W. (2006). The “millionaire” method for encouraging participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7 (1), 25–36.

Article   Google Scholar  

Betihavas, V., Bridgman, H., Kornhaber, R., & Cross, M. (2015). The evidence for ‘flipping out’: A systematic review of the flipped classroom in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 6 , 15–21.

Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. In ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA .

Google Scholar  

Bonwell, C. C. (1996). Enhancing the lecture: revitalizing a traditional format. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996 (67), 31–44.

Butt, A. (2014). Student views on the use of a flipped classroom approach: evidence from Australia. Business Education & Accreditation, 6 (1), 33–43.

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Cashin, W. E. (1985). Improving lectures. Idea paper no. 14 . Manhattan: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.

Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61 (4), 563–580.

Findlay-Thompson, S., & Mombourquette, P. (2014). Evaluation of a flipped classroom in an undergraduate business course. Business Education & Accreditation, 6 (1), 63–71.

Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of nutrition education and behavior, 47 (1), 109–114.

Hung, H. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28 (1), 81–96.

Huxham, M. (2005). Learning in lectures Do ‘interactive windows’ help? Active learning in higher education, 6 (1), 17–31.

King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College teaching, 41 (1), 30–35.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: an overview. Theory into practice, 41 (4), 212–218.

Larson, S., & Yamamoto, J. (2013). Flipping the college spreadsheet skills classroom: initial empirical results. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 4 (10), 751–758.

Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. (2014). Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45 (3), 317–324.

McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., …Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education , 77 (9), 196.

McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., …Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine , 89 (2), 236–243.

Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: new methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17 , 74–84.

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.

Rosie, A. (2000). “Deep learning”: a dialectical approach drawing on tutor-led web resources. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1 (1), 45–59.

Uzunboylu, H., & Karagozlu, D. (2015). Flipped classroom: a review of recent literature. World Journal on Educational Technology, 7 (2), 142–147.

Windschitl, M. (1999). Using small-group discussions in science lectures. College Teaching, 47 (1), 23–7.

Young, M. S., Robinson, S., & Alberts, P. (2009). Students pay attention! Combating the vigilance decrement to improve learning during lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10 (1), 41–55.

Download references

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Computer and Systems sciences, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Jalal Nouri

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jalal Nouri .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Nouri, J. The flipped classroom: for active, effective and increased learning – especially for low achievers. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 13 , 33 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0032-z

Download citation

Received : 27 February 2016

Accepted : 14 July 2016

Published : 24 August 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0032-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Teaching/learning strategies
• Distributed learning environments
• Improving classroom teaching
• Interactive learning environments
• Post- secondary education

Flipped learning: What is it, and when is it effective?

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, patricia roehling and patricia roehling professor emeritus of psychology - hope college @proehling carrie bredow carrie bredow associate professor of psychology - hope college @drb_hopeful.

September 28, 2021

Instructors are constantly on the lookout for more effective and innovative ways to teach. Over the last 18 months, this quest has become even more salient, as COVID-19 has shaken up the academic landscape and pushed teachers to experiment with new strategies for engaging their students. One innovative teaching method that may be particularly amenable to teaching during the pandemic is flipped learning. But does it work?

In this post, we discuss our new report summarizing the lessons from over 300 published studies on flipped learning. The findings suggest that, for many of us who work with students, flipped learning might be worth a try.

What is flipped learning?

Flipped learning is an increasingly popular pedagogy in secondary and higher education. Students in the flipped classroom view digitized or online lectures as pre-class homework, then spend in-class time engaged in active learning experiences such as discussions, peer teaching, presentations, projects, problem solving, computations, and group activities. In other words, this strategy “flips” the typical presentation of content, where class time is used for lectures and example problems, and homework consists of problem sets or group project work. (See Roehling, 2018 , for information on how to construct and implement flipped learning.)

Flipped learning is not simply a fad. There is theoretical support that it should promote student learning. According to constructivist theory, active learning enables students to create their own knowledge by building upon pre-existing cognitive frameworks, resulting in a deeper level of learning than occurs in more passive learning settings. Another theoretical advantage of flipped learning is that it allows students to incorporate foundational information into their long-term memory prior to class. This lightens the cognitive load during class, so that students can form new and deeper connections and develop more complex ideas. Finally, classroom activities in the flipped model can be intentionally designed to teach students valuable intra- and interpersonal skills.

Since 2012, the research literature on the effectiveness of flipped learning has grown exponentially. However, because these studies were conducted in many different contexts and published across a wide range of disciplines, a clear picture of whether and when flipped classrooms outperform their traditional lecture-based counterparts has been difficult to assemble.

To address this issue, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of flipped pedagogies ; this review focused specifically on higher education contexts. For our meta-analysis, we combined data from 317 studies (51,437 participants) that compared the effectiveness of flipped and lecture-based courses taught by the same instructor.

We assembled all of these studies to examine the efficacy of flipped versus lecture-based learning for fostering a variety of outcomes in higher education. Specifically, we examined outcomes falling into three broad categories:

• Academics , including exams and assignments measuring foundational knowledge, higher-order thinking, and applied/professional skills;
• Intra-/interpersonal aptitudes , including student engagement and identification with the course or discipline, metacognitive skills, and interpersonal skills; and
• Satisfaction with the course and instruction as reported by students.

We also explored the extent to which factors related to educational context (e.g., discipline, geographic location) and course design (e.g., the use of quizzes to motivate pre-class preparation) may shape the effectiveness of flipped learning. Below, we outline some of the key takeaways of our meta-analytic synthesis.

Is flipped learning more effective than lecture-based learning?

Yes, it certainly can be. Students in flipped classrooms performed better than those in traditionally taught classes across all of the academic outcomes we examined. In addition to confirming that flipped learning has a positive impact on foundational knowledge (the most common outcome in prior reviews of the research), we found that flipped pedagogies had a modest positive effect on higher-order thinking. Flipped learning was particularly effective at helping students learn professional and academic skills.

Importantly, we also found that flipped learning is superior to lecture-based learning for fostering all intra-/interpersonal outcomes examined, including enhancing students’ interpersonal skills, improving their engagement with the content, and developing their metacognitive abilities like time management and learning strategies.

In which educational settings is flipped learning most effective?

Flipped learning was shown to be more effective than lecture-based learning across most disciplines. However, we found that flipped pedagogies produced the greatest academic and intra-/interpersonal benefits in language, technology, and health-science courses. Flipped learning may be a particularly good fit for these skills-based courses, because class time can be spent practicing and mastering these skills. Mathematics and engineering courses, on the other hand, demonstrated the smallest gains when implementing flipped pedagogies.

The relative benefits of flipped learning also vary based upon geographic location across the globe. Whereas flipped courses outperformed lecture courses in all of the regions that were adequately represented in our meta-analysis, flipped classes in Middle Eastern and Asian countries produced greater academic and intra-/interpersonal gains than flipped courses implemented in Europe, North America, or Australia. These findings suggest that flipped learning may have the greatest impact in courses that, in the absence of flipped learning, adhere more strictly to a lecture-format, as is often the case in the Middle East and Asia. However, we might expect benefits in any context where active learning is used less regularly.

How can you design an effective flipped course?

When designing a flipped course, the conventional wisdom has been that instructors should use pre-class quizzes and assignments to ensure that students are prepared to participate in and benefit from the flipped class period. Surprisingly, we found little support for this in our analysis. While using in-class quizzes did not affect learning outcomes, using pre-class quizzes and assignments to hold students accountable actually produced lower academic gains. It’s unclear why this is the case. It may be that pre-class assignments shift the focus of student preparation; rather than striving to understand the course material, students focus on doing well on the quiz. This suggests that, to hold students accountable for pre-class preparation, instructors should consider using in-class quizzes and assessments rather than pre-class assignments.

We also found that more isn’t always better. Compared to courses where all (or nearly all) class sessions followed the flipped model (“fully flipped”), courses that combined flipped and lecture-based approaches (“partially flipped”) tended to produce better academic outcomes. Given the time and skill required to design effective flipped class sessions, partially flipped courses may be easier for instructors to implement successfully, particularly when they are new to the pedagogy. Partially flipped courses also give instructors the flexibility to flip content that lends itself best to the model, while saving more complex or foundational topics for in-class instruction.

What about student satisfaction?

Another reason to consider flipped learning is student satisfaction. We found that students in flipped classrooms reported greater course satisfaction than those in lecture-based courses. The size of this overall effect was fairly small, so flipping the classroom is not a silver bullet for instantly boosting course evaluations. But in no context did flipping the classroom hurt course ratings, and in some settings, including mathematics courses and courses taught in Asia and Europe, we observed more pronounced increases in student satisfaction.

Adopting a new pedagogy can be daunting, and a significant barrier to converting a course to a flipped format is the substantial time commitment involved in creating digitized lectures. However, during the 2020-2021 pandemic surges, many instructors were encouraged (if not forced) to find new ways of teaching, leading many to record their lectures or create other supplementary digital content. For instructors who have now created such digital content, this could be a great time to experiment with flipped learning.

Related Content

Bruce Fuller

March 4, 2021

Stephanie Riegg Cellini

August 13, 2021

Education Technology Higher Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

Monica Bhatt, Jonathan Guryan, Jens Ludwig

June 3, 2024

Emily Markovich Morris, Laura Nóra, Richaa Hoysala, Max Lieblich, Sophie Partington, Rebecca Winthrop

May 31, 2024

Online only

9:30 am - 11:00 am EDT

Accredited by Ministry of Research and Technology/ National Research  and  Innovation  Agency  of Indonesia

2007 2010 2014 2018   2022

Nur Asmawati Lawahid Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Datokarama Palu Indonesia

• Other Journals
• Editorial Board
• Peer-Reviewers
• Publication Ethics
• Focus & Scope
• Author Guidelines
• Publishing System
• Journal Indexing & Title Listing
• Scopus Citation Analysis
• Author Fees

• » Journal Statistics
• » Visitors Statistics
• » Flag Counter
• Announcements
• Online Submission

Developing the flipped learning instrument in an ESL context: The experts’ perspective

Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021

Aw-Yong, J., Anderson, N., & Chigeza, P. (2013). Developing culturally-responsive lessons on the iPAD for teaching English as Second Language to Chinese learners. 2013 IEEE 63rd Annual Conference International Council for Education Media (ICEM), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/CICEM.2013.6820186

Azman, H., & Dollsaid, N. F. (2018). Applying massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs) in EFL teaching. Arab World English Journal, 9(4), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no4.1

Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006

Balan, P., Clark, M., & Restall, G. (2015). Preparing students for flipped or team-based learning methods. Education + Training, 57(6), 639–657. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2014-0088

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.

Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 6219. https://peer.asee.org/the-flipped-classroom-a-survey-of-the-research

Bodomo, A. (2016). Afriphone literature as a prototypical form of African literature: Insights from prototype theory. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(5), 262–267. http://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/alls/article/view/2748

Bouzon, M., Govindan, K., Rodriguez, C. M. T., & Campos, L. M. S. (2016). Identification and analysis of reverse logistics barriers using Fuzzy Delphi method and AHP. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 108, 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.021

Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, & Chen, N.-S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.004

Coufal, K. (2014). Flipped learning instructional model: Perceptions of video delivery to support engagement in eighth grade math. Doctoral thesis, Lamar University, Beaumont, TX.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publication.

Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9305-6

Embi, M. A., Hussin, S., & Panah, E. (2014). Flipped learning readiness amongst graduate and postgraduate students in UKM. In M. A. Embi (Ed.), Blended and flipped learning: Case studies in Malaysia HEIs (pp. 209–223). Centre for Teaching and Learning Technologies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Embi, M. A. (2014). Blended & flipped learning: Case studies in Malaysian HEIs (M. A. Embi (ed.); 1st ed.). Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

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

Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. (2013). A review of flipped learning: Flipped learning network. Flipped Learning Network. https://flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/41/LitReview_FlippedLearning.pdf

Hao, Y. (2016). Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.032

Hidayat, W. (2018). Developing and validating an inventory of a national character (IKB) for secondary school students. Doctoral thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor.

Hidayat, W., & Lawahid, N. A. (2020). Metode Fuzzy Delphi untuk penelitian sosial. Alfabeta.

Ishikawa, A., Amagasa, M., Shiga, T., Tomizawa, G., Tatsuta, R., & Mieno, H. (1993). The max-min Delphi method and Fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy integration. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 55(3), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(93)90251-C

Jamaludin, R., & Osman, S. Z. M. (2014). The use of a flipped classroom to enhance engagement and promote active learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(2), 124–131. https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/10648

Juhary, J., & Amir, A. F. (2018). Flipped classroom at the Defence University. 4th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’18), 827–835. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAD18.2018.8093

Kafi, Z., & Motallebzadeh, K. (2014). A flipped classroom: Project-based instruction and 21st century skills. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 6(4), 35–46.

Kenna, D. C. (2014). A study of the effect the flipped classroom model on student self-efficacy. Master thesis, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota.

Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596759

McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., Gharkholonarehe, N., & Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(9), 196. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe779196

Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia education blueprint 2015-2025 (higher education). Ministry of Education Malaysia. https://www.um.edu.my/docs/um-magazine/4-executive-summary-pppm-2015-2025.pdf

Nederveld, A., & Berge, Z. L. (2015). Flipped learning in the workplace. Journal of Workplace Learning, 27(2), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-06-2014-0044

O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002

Osman, S. Z. M., Jamaludin, R., & Mokhtar, N. E. (2014). Flipped classroom and traditional classroom: Lecturer and student perceptions between two learning cultures, a case study at Malaysian polytechnic. International Education Research, 2(4), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.12735/ier.v2i4p16

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publication.

Sanchez-Lezama, A. P., Cavazos-Arroyo, J., & Albavera-Hernandez, C. (2014). Applying the Fuzzy Delphi Method for determining socio-ecological factors that influence adherence to mammography screening in rural areas of Mexico. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 30(2), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00025113

Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 5, 147–158. https://ethnobotanyjournal.org/index.php/era/article/view/126

Tsay, C. H.-H., Kofinas, A., & Luo, J. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 121, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.009

Wiginton, B. L. (2013). Flipped instruction: An investigation into the effect of learning environment on student self-efficacy, learning style, and academic achievement in an Algebra I classroom. Doctoral thesis, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Yemma, D. M. (2015). Impacting learning for 21st century students: A phenomenological study of higher education faculty utilizing a flipped learning approach. Doctoral thesis, Robert Morris University, Moon Twp, PA.

• There are currently no refbacks.

Find Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan on :

ISSN 2338-6061 (online)     ||    ISSN  2685-7111 (print)

View Journal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan Visitor Statistics

• Instructions for Authors
• Submit Log in/Register

Share this article with

Create alert.

Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period

How to cite: Ożadowicz, A. Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period. Preprints 2024 , 2024052042. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.2042.v2 Ożadowicz, A. Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period. Preprints 2024, 2024052042. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.2042.v2 Copy

Ożadowicz, A. Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period. Preprints 2024 , 2024052042. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.2042.v2

Ożadowicz, A. (2024). Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.2042.v2

Ożadowicz, A. 2024 "Blended Learning and Flipped Classroom in Higher Engineering Education: Case Study and Students’ Perception in the Post-COVID-19 Period" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.2042.v2

Copyright: This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Comments (0)

Not displayed online.

Mathematical equations can be typed in either LaTeX formats \\[ ... \\] or $$ ... $$, or MathML format <math> ... </math>. Try the LaTeX or MathML example.

Please click a symbol to insert it into the message box below:

Please enter the link here:

Optionally, you can enter text that should appear as linked text:

Please enter or paste the URL to the image here (please only use links to jpg/jpeg, png and gif images):

Wikify editor is a simple editor for wiki-style mark-up. It was written by MDPI for Sciforum in 2014. The rendering of the mark-up is based on Wiky.php with some tweaks. Rendering of mathematical equations is done with MathJax . Please send us a message for support or for reporting bugs.

Comments must follow the standards of professional discourse and should focus on the scientific content of the article. Insulting or offensive language, personal attacks and off-topic remarks will not be permitted. Comments must be written in English. Preprints reserves the right to remove comments without notice. Readers who post comments are obliged to declare any competing interests, financial or otherwise.

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

what’s this?

Add a record of this review to Publons to track and showcase your reviewing expertise across the world’s journals.

File(s) under embargo

until file(s) become available

Applying Flipped Learning Concepts to Simulation and Its Impact on the Retention of Non-technical Skills

Degree grantor, degree level, degree name, committee member, submitted date, thesis type, usage metrics.

Teaching diagnostic radiology to radiology majors: Implementation and evaluation of a flipped classroom model

Affiliations.

• 1 Department of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
• 2 Department of Pharmacology, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
• 3 Department of Clinical Psychology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
• PMID: 38796737
• DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2024.2351138

Purpose: Radiology instruction focuses on cultivating medical students' diagnostic thinking skills and practical competence, and lecture-based learning (LBL) is the most commonly used teaching approach. While fact-based, this type of traditional instruction is often non-engaging, leading to a shift toward student-centered models, one of which is the flipped classroom (FC). However, studies involving a comprehensive evaluation of students' experiences using the FC approach and its effects on their learning are lacking. Therefore, this study analyzed the teaching efficacy of the FC approach based on data of large groups of radiology students, accumulated over time.

Methods: Data from 636 medical radiology students taught using the FC and LBL models from 2012 to 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

Results: The test scores of the FC group were significantly higher than those of the LBL group, and improvements in learning initiative and learning ability were notably higher in the FC than in the LBL group. The two groups showed no significant difference in the critical thinking disposition indicator, and the proportion of students with positive critical thinking tendencies was higher in the FC than in the LBL group. The academic and social self-perception scores of the FC group were significantly higher than those of the LBL group, and there was a significant difference in Kolb's learning style.

Conclusions: Based on evidence of completing pre-, in-, and after-class work, the FC approach improved students' academic performance, learning initiative, diagnostic ability, and satisfaction with learning and the teaching institution. Our findings suggest that FC instruction promotes students' assimilation and convergence of learning styles, and cultivates positive critical thinking.

Keywords: Flipped classroom; Kolb’s learning styles; critical thinking disposition; educational environment; radiology.

Building reliable and transparent machine learning systems using structured intermediate representations

 Machine learning (ML) is increasingly used to drive complex applications such as web-scale search, content recommendation, autonomous vehicles, and language-based digital assistants. In recent years, these systems have become predominantly data-driven, often underpinned by deep learning models that learn complex functions end-to-end from large amounts of available data. But their purely data-driven nature also makes the learned solutions opaque, sample inefficient, and brittle. 

To improve reliability, production solutions often take the form of ML systems that leverage the strengths of deep learning models while handling auxiliary functions such as planning, validation, decision logic, and policy compliance using other components of the system. However, because these methods are often applied post-hoc on fully trained, blackbox deep learning models, their ability to improve system reliability and transparency is limited. 

In this thesis, we study how to build more reliable and transparent ML systems using ML models with structured intermediate representations (StructIRs). Compared to non-structured representations such as neural network activations, StructIRs are directly obtained by optimizing a well-defined objective and are structurally constrained (e.g., to normalized embeddings or compilable code) while remaining sufficiently expressive for downstream tasks. They can thus make the resulting ML system more reliable and transparent by increasing modularity and making modeling assumptions explicit. 

We explore the role of StructIRs in three different ML systems. In our first work, we use simple probability distributions parameterized by neural networks to build an effective ML-driven datacenter storage policy. In our second work, we show that grounding text generation in a well-structured vector embedding space enables effective transformation of high-level text attributes such as tense and sentiment with simple, interpretable vector arithmetic. In our final work, we conduct human subject studies showing that the stationarity assumptions behind bandit-based recommender systems do not hold in practice, demonstrating the importance of validating the assumptions and structures underlying ML systems 

Degree Type

• Dissertation
• Machine Learning

Degree Name

• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Usage metrics

• Artificial Intelligence and Image Processing

Vishal Naik, a mathematics education major, described that asking the question “Why?” changed his perspective

Posted in: Student Experiences , Students and Alumni

The biggest switch that was flipped in my head about math was when I was asked the question why? Why does this method work? Why does the math work? It lead me to fall in love with the process of math, way more then the end goal. Sure, the goal was what I would be working towards, but there was something special about learning the methodology behind it, and how it could be applied elsewhere, both in math and in the real world. I’ve even begun to introduce this to my students, and tell them to question everything. Ask why it works, don’t just find the answer. Understanding the process of math will help one better understand and appreciate what it has to offer. That ‘AHA’ moment on a students’ face when they finally understand makes teaching this all so worth it.