research paper on flipped classroom

Advertisement

• Next Article

1.  Introduction

2.  institutional details, 3.  experimental design, 4.  descriptive statistics and implementation details, 5.  empirical framework, 6.  results, 7.  conclusion, acknowledgments, effects of flipped classroom instruction: evidence from a randomized trial.

• Cite Icon Cite
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Permissions
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Search Site

Elizabeth Setren , Kyle Greenberg , Oliver Moore , Michael Yankovich; Effects of Flipped Classroom Instruction: Evidence from a Randomized Trial. Education Finance and Policy 2021; 16 (3): 363–387. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00314

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

In a flipped classroom, an increasingly popular pedagogical model, students view a video lecture at home and work on exercises with the instructor during class time. Advocates of the flipped classroom claim the practice not only improves student achievement but also ameliorates the achievement gap. We conduct a randomized controlled trial at West Point and find the flipped classroom produced short-term gains in math and no effect in economics. The flipped model broadened the achievement gap: Effects are driven by white, male, and higher-achieving students. We find no long-term average effects on student learning but the widened achievement gap persists. Our findings demonstrate feasibility for the flipped classroom to induce short-term gains in student learning; however, the exacerbation of the achievement gap, the effect fade-out, and the null effects in economics, suggest that educators should exercise caution when considering the model.

Technology plays an increasing role in education and opens up a myriad of possibilities for educators to innovate on the traditional lecture format. One option, called the “flipped classroom,” involves students learning the material by watching video lectures prior to class. This frees up class time for more in-depth discussion and application of the concepts through practice problems, group work, and increased interaction with the instructor (Brame 2013 ). Industry surveys estimate that over half of U.S. colleges use the flipped classroom and its popularity is growing (Schaffhuaser 2016 ; Schaffhauser and Kelly 2016 ). A range of education nonprofits, textbook publishers, and technology companies have capitalized on increasing interest in the format by providing videos and other educational tools.

Despite the proliferation of the flipped classroom, little well-identified evidence exists on its impact on student learning. Proponents claim this model not only boosts student achievement but also ameliorates the achievement gap through increased student–teacher interaction (Supiano 2018 ). The increased contact with students may make instructors more responsive to students’ needs, which could be particularly beneficial for lower-achieving students who might otherwise not seek out assistance (Bergmann and Sams 2012 ; Goodwin and Miller 2013 ).

Opponents of the flipped classroom worry that it requires extensive work by instructors to create engaging videos and interactive classroom activities and hinges on students’ engagement with the material outside of class (Lo and Hew 2017 ). The flipped classroom may take more time for students and will leave them without a foundational overview of the concepts if they do not watch the videos. Furthermore, if lower-income students have less reliable Internet access, it could exacerbate inequalities.

This study presents causal estimates of the flipped classroom's impact on student learning using a randomized controlled trial at West Point. We conducted the study during one unit in two mandatory core-curriculum courses, Introduction to Calculus and Principals of Economics, allowing us to explore the impact of the flipped classroom in two different subjects. Aspects of West Point and these two classes make it an ideal setting for this randomized controlled trial. Both courses require extensive problem-solving, a common attribute of flipped classroom courses (Berrett 2012 ). They also lend themselves well to consistent grading to provide an objective measurement of student learning. West Point standardizes the curriculum, teaching, and exams of these two high-enrollment courses across the eighty course sections. Additionally, the registrar randomly assigns students to course sections so that the sections have similar sets of students.

We randomly assigned course sections to flipped classrooms or standard lectures. To remove individual instructor effects on student learning outcomes, we assigned each instructor to at least one section in the control group and one section in the treatment group. The flipped classroom treatment consisted of a standardized video lecture that instructors told students to watch before class, and interactive problem-solving during class time. Students in the control group received a standardized lecture in class, with identical content to the video lecture. They were also given the same problems to work on as the treatment group, but to solve outside of class. To isolate the impact of the flipped format, we held the lecture material, instructor, and practice problems constant, and altered the format and time in which students engage with the practice problems and lectures. If students complete all of the assigned work, we expect students to spend a similar amount of time preparing for class: completing the readings and watching the videos for the flipped classroom and completing the readings and working on the practice problems for the standard lectures.

We find that the flipped classroom does not reduce the achievement gap as proponents suggest. The flipped classroom produced a strong, positive short-term effect in math and null effect in economics. Students in the flipped math classrooms scored 0.3 standard deviations above the mean on the unit quiz relative to their peers in the standard classroom. However, female, black, and Hispanic students, and students with lower baseline academic performance (measured by their ACT scores), do not experience gains from the math flipped classroom; the math effects are driven by white, male, and higher-achieving students. The flipped classroom has a 69 percent larger white/nonwhite (black or Hispanic) achievement gap relative to the standard lecture and it exacerbates the difference by 23 percent between students who scored in the top and bottom ACT quartile. Although the average effects fade by the course final, the achievement gaps persist. We observe lower levels of student engagement (both in and out of the classroom) and instructor interest in the less-effective flipped classrooms. Our findings demonstrate that it is feasible for the flipped classroom to induce large gains in student learning in a short period of time, but that the effects vary by subject, student characteristics, and teacher motivation for the flipped classroom technique. The exacerbation of the achievement gap, the fade-out of effects, and the different effects by subject suggest that educators should exercise caution when considering the flipped classroom.

This study contributes to a growing literature on technology and education (see Escueta et al. 2017 for a summary). Within the education technology literature, work on the impact of online courses is particularly relevant. Randomized studies find small negative effects of fully online courses compared to in-person lectures (Figlio, Rush, and Yin 2013 ) and similar effects of standard lectures relative to reduced lecture time with access to online course materials or machine-guided instruction (Bowen et al. 2014 ; Joyce et al. 2015 ; Alpert, Couch, and Harmon 2016 ). Bettinger et al. ( 2017 ) find that negative effects of online course-taking are particularly large for students with lower prior grade point averages.

Descriptive flipped classroom research finds mixed results. 1 However, because of these studies’ nonrandom designs, differences between student outcomes in the flipped and standard classrooms could be due to differences in course material, instructor quality, student preparation or characteristics, or other factors. Our study is most akin to Wozny, Balser, and Ives ( 2018 ), whose randomized controlled trial finds that the flipped classroom boosted students’ scores in econometrics. One drawback is that the authors’ seven course sections serve as the sample for the study. Because of the small number of sections, they randomize the flipped or standard teaching methods across lectures within the same sections, which could produce spillover effects. 2

Our study contributes to this relatively understudied topic by running a randomized controlled trial with a large number of class sections, students, and instructors, and by holding all aspects other than the flipped classroom constant, including the course materials, course content, and instructors. All twenty-nine instructors of the two courses participated in the experiment, allowing us to understand the effects of flipped classrooms for a range of instructor types, not just those most motivated to pedagogically innovate. We provide the first causal flipped classroom evidence from classroom level randomization and the first flipped classroom estimates for two separate subjects.

The next section provides background on West Point and the flipped classroom. Section 3 describes the design of the experiment and section 4 details the characteristics of the students, classrooms, and instructors in the study. Section 5 lays out the empirical framework. Section 6 presents the results, provides evidence to explain the differential effects in math and economics, and explores the equity implications. Section 7 offers concluding thoughts.

The United States Military Academy at West Point is a four-year undergraduate institution that prepares students to become military officers. In addition, West Point shares many characteristics with small, liberal arts schools. Each cohort has approximately 1,100 cadets and they complete a twenty-seven-course liberal arts curriculum. West Point caps class sizes at eighteen cadets per instructor and the average class has sixteen cadets per instructor. West Point also has some unique characteristics that distinguish it from other postsecondary institutions. Cadets must receive permission to miss class, there is a high level of discipline in the classroom, the cadet population is predominately male, and, considering the propensity for cadets to serve in combat after graduation, cadets are probably less risk-averse than the average U.S. college student. 3

West Point has a competitive admissions process. Applicants must receive a nomination from one of their Congressional representatives and must demonstrate physical fitness. As a result, West Point students are more athletic and geographically diverse than typical universities. The U.S. News and World Report ranks West Point as number eighteen in their list of National Liberal Arts Colleges. 4 West Point students have a mean SAT score of 627 in Reading and 645 in Math (out of a possible score of 800 in each), comparable to similarly ranked liberal arts colleges (West Point 2019 ).

West Point has three types of faculty members: senior military faculty, civilian professors, and junior rotating military faculty. The senior military faculty serve permanently at West Point and most hold a doctorate degree. Civilian professors typically serve on the faculty for a prolonged period and have PhDs. The junior military faculty spend three years teaching and hold a master's degree in their area of instruction. The junior military faculty teach lower level electives and the more basic core curriculum courses, while civilian and senior military faculty teach more advanced courses.

The first two years at West Point are almost exclusively core curriculum courses. In order to accommodate the large enrollment, West Point offers many sections of these courses. Students are highly incentivized to do well because grades determine job placement after graduation. Because of the importance of course performance, West Point prioritizes standardizing courses and course grading. Course directors set the syllabus, lesson objectives, assignments, and exams so that they are consistent across all instructors teaching the course. New instructors receive training from the course director to further ensure standardization across class sections. The course standardization and randomization of students to course sections makes West Point an ideal place to study the flipped classroom.

The experiment took place in the 2016 Fall semester in two required core courses: Introduction to Calculus and Principles of Economics. We selected these courses because their quantitative nature lends themselves to interactive problem-solving. This method links well with the active teaching style the flipped classroom strategy utilizes.

Cadets take the math class in their first semester at West Point and take Principles, their first economics course, in their sophomore year. Students with stronger math backgrounds and students interested in majoring in Economics can take more advanced and in-depth versions of these classes. Because of the small number of advanced classes, we excluded these class sections from the study.

Class Size and Teaching Load

Notes: This table describes the number of instructors, sections, and students in the treatment and control groups. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.

We selected a three-lesson unit from both the math and economics courses to conduct the experiment. This discrete group of lessons enabled strict adherence to the experimental design. We think our experiment gives a lower bound on the impact of the flipped classroom for several reasons. First, the faculty involved are all new to the flipped classroom format and we would expect their effectiveness to improve with more experience. Second, our experiment occurs in the middle of the courses: in the lessons 14 through 16 of the math course and in lessons 22 through 24 for economics (after the microeconomics units and before the macroeconomics units). It may be challenging for faculty to switch and be disruptive for students. Lastly, we observe instructors in both the standard lecture and the flipped classroom, so instructors cannot focus their preparation time on one type of class.

We chose the vector and personal finance 5 units for the study because neither required nor built upon prior knowledge of the subject area. The math unit covered dot products and parametric equations. The personal finance unit in economics covered budgeting, present discounted value, and retirement and investment calculations. Some young people are exposed to the basics of personal finance through self-study, interactions with parents, and previous employment. In contrast, students have little to no prior knowledge of the vector math covered in the unit.

The course directors created and lectured in the videos. We chose to have one set of videos for each course (instead of having each instructor create their own video series) to ensure that each treated section had access to the same quality video with an experienced lecturer. We vetted the videos for consistent formatting between math and economics and piloted them in the summer prior to the experiment. We posted the videos to an internal West Point Web site that required students to log in to view the videos. This allowed us to monitor each student's video watching. The Web site allowed any student with the link to watch the video as many times as they wanted. 6

Class Structure

Class Format for Treatment and Control Groups

In addition, students in the flipped classroom were tasked with watching a 20-minute video lesson before each of the three lessons in the unit. Students in the treatment group were e-mailed instructions to watch videos before class and given reminders during lecture. They were informed that instructors would track whether they watched the videos. The e-mail emphasized that watching the video was important to their learning and they would lose participation points for not watching. Instructors were directed not to inform students about their participation in the experiment.

Upon arriving to class, instructors took attendance and made class announcements for both the treatment and control groups. Then, the treatment classrooms proceeded with a question-and-answer session with the instructor about the video for that lesson. The instructors were provided clear guidance to avoid lengthy lectures during this period, but to use the opportunity to clarify specific questions.

Then the flipped classrooms worked on a problem set with ten to fifteen practice problems that linked directly to the lesson objectives. The video covered the material in the problem sets and modeled how to solve similar problems. Instructors were given strict guidelines to not conduct a traditional lecture, but instead guide the students through the worksheet and answer any questions they might have. Implementation of the problem set varied from instructor to instructor. Some instructors would have the cadets complete one problem at a time and then have the class discuss the solution. Other instructors would let the cadets work the entire way through the worksheet uninterrupted and circulated the room to answer individual questions.

The control group experienced little change to the normal class procedures. After class administrative tasks, the instructors delivered a standardized lecture to the cadets that mirrored the content in the videos. The math course director provided a detailed script for instructors to follow in delivering the lesson. The economics control group class delivered the lecture following the same slides built into the economics flipped classroom video. During the course of the lecture, both math and economics instructors worked through quantitative problems on the board. Instructors could take questions throughout the lecture.

As the control group students departed at the end of the class period, instructors handed out practice problem worksheets that the flipped classroom students worked on during class. Instructors encouraged students to complete the worksheets prior to the next class but instructors did not collect or grade the worksheets. Therefore, the control group students had the same opportunity to practice problems as the flipped classroom. Course directors circulated the classrooms during the experiment to check for proper implementation of both the flipped and control classrooms.

There were no strong incentives to watch the video or to complete the practice problems outside of class. Because of the military nature of West Point, students may be more likely to follow instructions than the typical college student. However, survey data find (see descriptive statistics below) that students spend less time preparing for class than recommended and do not all watch the videos in full. If compliance for class instructions is stronger among West Point students relative to other college settings, it affects both the treatment and control students similarly, since they are each instructed to do work outside of the classroom (e.g., watching videos or completing practice problems). West Point has a strict attendance policy, so we are able to control the amount of time that students spend in class with instructors. If the flipped classroom changes student attendance in less strict settings, then we will not see the effects of this in our study.

After the completion of the three-lesson block, students in both the flipped and standard classrooms took an in-class quiz that covered the material of the experiment's lessons. The in-class quiz accounted for 3 percent of the math course and 3.5 percent of the economics course grades. Both the treatment and control groups received identical quizzes.

To test for fade-out of knowledge or whether students improved their knowledge of the material before the final exam, we analyze performance on the unit-specific questions on the final exams and the overall final exam grade. For math, the exam was administered in May 2017 and for economics the exam took place in December 2016. For both classes, the exam accounted for 25 percent of the course grade.

Student Characteristics and Covariate Balance

Notes: This table reports descriptive statistics of students in the experiment. Column 1 reports mean characteristics of the control group (students in classrooms with the standard lecture format) and column 2 reports means for students in the treatment group (flipped classrooms). Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. Columns 3, 4, and 5 report coefficient estimates from a regression of the baseline characteristics on an indicator variable that equals one if a student is assigned to a flipped classroom. The regressions used to construct estimates in columns 3, 4, and 5 include (course) x (instructor) and (course) x (hour) fixed effects. Standard errors, clustered on classrooms (each instructor-hour combination), are reported in parentheses. The reported p -values come from a joint test of the null hypothesis that all coefficients are equal to zero.

Column 3 of table 2 reports the regression-adjusted differences between students assigned to treatment classrooms and students assigned to control group classrooms. We construct these differences from regressions that include instructor fixed effects and class schedule block fixed effects. The differences between treatment and control classroom characteristics are all small and statistically insignificant, suggesting assignment to treatment or control groups was as good as random. A test of the joint-hypothesis that all differences in baseline characteristics equal 0 yields a p -value of 0.966 (bottom row of table 2 ), further suggesting that the randomization was effective. These similarities would indicate that any difference in the performance of the flipped and standard classrooms can be attributed to the treatment of the flipped classroom.

Columns 4 and 5 of table 2 report the same covariate balance checks after restricting the sample to math and economics classes, respectively. As with the estimates reported in column 3, there are no noticeable differences between the treatment and control groups for either class type.

Table A.1, which is available in a separate online appendix that can be accessed on Education Finance and Policy ’s Web site at https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00314 , explores attrition rates for taking the unit quiz and final exam, the key outcomes of interest. Approximately 97 percent of the sample takes the quiz and the treatment and control groups have similar quiz-taking rates. The final exam attrition rate is twice as large as the quiz attrition. While attrition is not statistically significantly different in the economics treatment and control groups, the treatment group in math has a marginally significantly higher attrition rate relative to the control group. We estimate Lee ( 2009 ) treatment-effect bounds and find that attrition does not bias our findings.

Classroom Characteristics

Instructors and Class Size

Consistent with West Point's small class sizes, the average class in the study has 16.6 students (see table 1 ). Flipped and standard math classes both had student–teacher ratios of 16.7. Economics classrooms had similar class sizes of 16.1 for flipped and 16.7 for standard lectures.

A total of twenty-nine instructors participated in the experiment, with twenty from math and nine from economics. The majority of instructors were military officers with three or fewer years of teaching experience. The rest of the instructors were senior military officers (three in math, one in economics) and civilian faculty (also three in math, one in economics). These faculty each had at least five years of teaching experience. 8

Before teaching any classes, all U.S. Military Academy instructors must pass a rigorous six-week training course where they learn best teaching practices, observe experienced instructors teach summer classes, and present practice lectures to a panel of senior military and civilian faculty members. The experiment took place at roughly the mid-point of the fall semester, so all instructors had a minimum of two months of teaching experience, plus the six-week training course, before the experiment began.

Class Time Allocation

We administered an instructor survey at the conclusion of the course to gather descriptive information about how the flipped and standard classrooms functioned in practice. Over 86 percent of instructors completed the survey. Table A.1 in the online appendix shows no differential attrition across whether treatment or control students had an instructor who responded to the survey. We also administered student surveys at the end of the class and collected video-watching data that we discuss below.

Notes: This table describes the flipped and standard classrooms using data from a post-study instructor survey. Panel A displays the average percent of time instructors reported spending on different activities. Items did not need to add up to 100 percent because some activities could happen simultaneously (e.g., answering individual questions and having students work in a group). Panel B shows the percent of time the instructor observed students doing an activity in class. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.

The flipped classroom also involved more in-class group and independent work than the standard lecture: Instructors said that students worked in groups 76 percent of the time in flipped classrooms and 5 percent of the time in standard classrooms. Math instructors reported that students worked in groups for only 1.5 percent of class time in the standard lecture, while group work was more common in the economics standard lectures: constituting 12.5 percent of time. Students also worked alone on practice problems more frequently in the flipped relative to the standard classrooms, with the starkest difference in math (36.8 percent versus 4.4 percent) and a smaller difference in economics (15.6 percent versus 9.4 percent).

Math faculty spent more time answering questions for the whole class in the standard classroom than the flipped classrooms, but more time circulating around the classroom to answer individual student questions in the flipped classroom. Economics instructors reported a similar pattern but with a larger difference between the amount of time answering questions in front of the class.

Instructors spent small and similar amounts of time reviewing old material and other tasks in the flipped and standard lectures.

Student Behaviors

We also asked instructors to report behaviors of students during class time (see panel B in table 3 ). Some student behaviors reflect clear differences between flipped and standard classrooms: Faculty reported 76 percent of students working in groups in a typical flipped classroom, compared with 11 percent of students in the standard lecture.

Other survey responses suggest different implementation in the math sections compared to the economics sections. In math, working alone was more than twice as common in the flipped versus the standard classroom. However, in economics, the relationship was flipped. Additionally, while asking and answering questions were more common in the math flipped classrooms relative to the standard lectures (consistent with the flipped classroom model), students asked and answered questions at similar rates in the flipped and standard economics classrooms. Also, math instructors reported higher note-taking rates in the standard lecture than the flipped classroom, while economics instructors reported only a slightly higher rate in the standard classrooms. Together, these survey results suggest that the math classes implemented the flipped classroom model more fully than economics.

Lastly, instructors perceived that more students paid attention in math in the flipped classroom (77.9 percent versus 61.8 percent), while attention in economics was greater in the standard lecture (71.9 percent versus 65.6 percent in the flipped classroom). 9 This shows that math instructors found the flipped classroom to be more engaging, while economics faculty found the standard lecture preferable for students.

Time and Activities Outside of Class

Video Watching

Notes: This table reports average video watching behaviors of students in flipped and standard classrooms. Panel A data come from log-in and streaming data to the Web site that hosted the video lectures. Panel B data come from a post-study student survey. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.

We track the proportion of the video data that streamed to students’ computers and find that on average students watch roughly 50 percent of the video content in math and economics. 10 In a survey at the end of the course, we asked students about how they watched the videos. The responses in panel B of table 4 show that over three fourths of the math flipped classroom students report repeating sections when they watch the video compared with only 37 percent of economics students. Students reported low rates of multitasking while watching the videos in math (6 percent), but higher rates (31 percent) in economics.

Class Preparation

The random assignment of classrooms to flipped or standard lecture format ensures that we estimate the causal impact of the flipped classroom. However, the flipped classroom format could increase the time spent on the class or time spent on practice problems. If these changes influence student outcomes, then it is possible the effects are driven by changes in the amount of time students spend on the class and not from the flipped classroom format.

Student Preparation Outside of Class

Notes: This table reports end-of-course survey responses from students in flipped and standard classrooms. Columns 1, 2, 4, and 5 show the mean responses and columns 3 and 6 show the p -value of the test of whether the flipped and standard classroom means are equal. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.

Math flipped classroom and standard classroom students report spending similar amounts of time outside of class on practice problems (see panel A of table 5 ). Because the treatment group worked on the problems in class, this signals they have overall more time to work on practice problems relative to the control group, which could contribute to the higher average scores on the quiz. In contrast, economics students in standard classrooms spend significantly more time on practice problems outside of class relative to their flipped classroom peers.

Flipped classroom students are also similarly likely to complete some or all the readings for class (see panel B of table 5 ). Approximately 24 percent of math students report completing the readings for every class and over 83 percent complete some of the readings for each class. Reading completion is less common in economics: Over 10 percent of students report completing all of the readings and over 59 percent complete some of the readings.

Effect of Treatment on Academic Outcomes

Notes: This table reports estimates from regressions of exam scores on an indicator for being assigned to a flipped classroom. All scores are standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 for each subject. Baseline controls include instructor fixed effects and class hour (i.e., time block) fixed effects. Demographic controls include indicators for female, white, black, Hispanic, and for having prior military service, plus linear terms for age, ACT score, and West Point's College Entrance Exam Rank score. Standard errors, clustered on classroom, are reported in parentheses.

*** Significant at the 1% level; ** significant at the 5% level; * significant at the 10% level.

Subsequent columns of table 6 reveal that only math classes experience the short-term positive effect of flipped classrooms. Columns 3 and 4 indicate that the flipped classroom environment improved test scores of students in math classes by roughly 0.3 standard deviations. We see positive effects for both rote questions that involve memorization and more advanced questions that require problem-solving.

In contrast to the math results, the average test scores among economics students in flipped classrooms were roughly 0.07 standard deviations lower than the average test scores of economics students in standard classrooms, though this estimate is only marginally significant and indistinguishable from zero when we correct for the number of clusters. 13 , 14

To investigate whether the positive impact of flipped classrooms on math classes persists, we test the effect of the flipped classroom on the final exam. We estimate the effect for both the overall score and for the questions specific to the experimental unit. 15 We ensured that the difficulty and content of the final exam questions for the experimental unit material was comparable to that of the experimental unit quiz. Students in the math-flipped classrooms perform similarly to those in the standard lecture for both the questions on the final—specific to the experimental unit—and the final exam overall. The point estimates are positive but small, ranging from 0.039 to 0.057 standard deviations, and are indistinguishable from zero. Although we cannot rule out positive effects on the order of one fifth of a standard deviation, these estimates do suggest the positive impact of the flipped-classroom environment on math comprehension likely faded with time. The overall final exam scores between students in flipped classrooms and students in standard lecture classrooms did not vary, which is unsurprising because the flipped classroom experiment did not extend beyond the specific set of lectures described above.

In online table A.3, we investigate the faded-out effects by reporting the mean test scores of treatment and control students for the quiz, and the questions specific to the experimental unit on the final. We find that flipped classroom students increase their knowledge of the experimental unit's content following the quiz: They score 22 percent higher on the unit-specific final exam questions relative to the quiz (see column 1 of table A.3). Because the quiz and final questions cover the same content with highly comparable questions, this denotes that average student knowledge of the subject grew over time. The control group also increased their average score from the quiz to the final and caught up to the flipped classroom students: Both groups scored similarly, on average, on the final questions specific to the experimental unit. This means the null effects on the final exam stem from the control group's catching up and not that the flipped classroom students’ knowledge faded.

Table 6 reports no long-term test effects for students in economics classes for the unit-specific final exam questions, suggesting that if the flipped classroom had any initially deleterious effects on economics students, they likely faded over time. Puzzlingly, students in the flipped classroom scored about 0.1 standard deviations lower on the final exam overall relative to students in the control group. However, after we account for the small number of clusters among economics students, this effect is not statistically significant (see the p -values in online table A.4). As a result, we think the small difference in point estimates is due to noise and the small number of clusters.

Differential Effects Across Subjects

What explains the short-term positive effects of the flipped classroom in math and the null effects in economics? We chose these subjects because both are quantitative and involve problem-solving, common features of flipped classroom subjects. However, while both courses have problem-solving aspects, the math lessons included a higher proportion of problem-solving questions than economics, which included relatively more rote memorization. Because of this, perhaps the material in the math lecture lent itself better to the flipped classroom.

Notes: This figure plots the instructor-specific quiz effects by whether they preferred the flipped or standard classroom in a post-study survey. Estimates come from regressions of exam scores on an indicator for being assigned to a flipped classroom that include baseline demographic controls and class hour fixed effects. Larger circles reflect more precise estimates: circle size is weighted by the inverse variance of the effects.

Effect of Math Instructor Preferences on Unit Quiz Score

Notes: This table reports estimates from a regression of unit-quiz exam scores on an indicator for being assigned to a flipped classroom for students in the math section. Columns 2 and 3 report estimates from regressions that interact the flipped classroom indicator with an indicator for whether the instructor preferred teaching a flipped classroom in a post-study instructor survey. We do not report analogous estimates for economics classrooms because all economics instructors preferred the standard lecture format over the flipped classroom format. All scores have been standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 and the controls are the same as those described in table 5 . Standard errors, clustered on classroom, are reported in parentheses.

*** Significant at the 1% level; * significant at the 10% level.

There are two issues with these survey data. Because we surveyed instructors at the conclusion of the experiment, their preferences could have been influenced by how effective they thought they were in the flipped versus standard classroom. Second, it is possible that instructors exhibit the Hawthorne effect: Instructors who do not like the flipped classroom may choose to reduce their effort, which could then explain the null or negative outcomes for instructors who prefer the standard lecture. Together, these complications suggest the need for instructors to actively want to implement the flipped classroom, along with training and support instructors.

We find evidence of lower levels of engagement among economics flipped classroom students, both in and out of the classroom. This could contribute to the differential effects between the subjects. Economics students rated the video less useful relative to math students in our end of semester survey (see panel C of table 5 ). On average, the math treatment group rated the video 50 percent more helpful than the reading. In contrast, economics treatment group students rated the videos and readings similarly useful. Also, the economics students found the videos less helpful than the math students: Economics students rated the videos an average of 0.35 out of 1 (with 0 denoting not helpful and 1 denoting very helpful), compared with the math students’ rating of 0.62 out of 1. Economics flipped classroom students also report lower rates than math students of repeating sections of the video and higher rates of multitasking while watching the video. These findings suggest higher levels of engagement and interest in the videos (a key component of the flipped classroom model) among math students compared with economics students.

Instructor survey responses also reveal higher levels of student engagement for the flipped classroom relative to the standard classroom for math. Table 3 shows that math instructors observe higher rates of students paying attention, asking questions, working in groups, and working independently in their flipped classrooms relative to their standard lectures. In contrast, economics faculty report lower rates of paying attention and similar rates of asking questions in the flipped classrooms relative to their standard classrooms—signaling lower levels of engagement. Lastly, math instructors report increased student–teacher and student–peer interaction in the flipped classroom through more question-asking and group work (see table 3 ). In contrast, economics instructors only report increased group work in their flipped classrooms but similar amounts of student questions. In summary, the math flipped classrooms had more student engagement and student-teacher interactions than the math standard lectures, but economics treatment and control classrooms had fewer differences for these classroom characteristics.

Lastly, students in economics standard classrooms spend significantly more time on practice problems outside of class relative to the flipped classroom economics students. In contrast, math students report spending similar amounts of time on practice problems outside of class in the flipped and standard classrooms. This additional practice time for the control group in economics may play a role in the similar test scores of the treated and control groups in economics.

Equity Implications: Subgroup Effects

Subgroup Analysis

Notes: This table reports estimates from a regression of unit-quiz exam scores on an indicator for being assigned to a flipped classroom for the subgroups identified in each row. All scores have been standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 for each subject. All estimates include the controls described in table 5 . Standard errors, clustered on classroom, are reported in parentheses.

Together, these subgroup effects show that the flipped classroom has the opposite equity implications as proponents claim. By having a null effect on the bottom of the math ability distribution, the flipped classroom exacerbated the achievement gap while not serving women, black students, and Hispanic students. 16 , 17

Notes: This figure displays the racial and baseline academic ability achievement gaps for the treatment and control groups for both the quiz and the final exam questions specific to the experimental unit's content. Achievement gaps are calculated by differencing the mean standardized scores of the top and bottom ACT quartiles and the white and Black or Hispanic students.

The subgroup analysis among Economics classrooms reveals few noticeable differences, although it does appear that the flipped classroom is least effective for the highest ACT quartile (even though there is no statistically significant difference between the top and bottom of the ACT distribution as there is with math). It appears that the racial achievement gap is larger in the flipped classroom relative to the standard lecture for both the quiz and final exam questions (see figure 3 ), although we find mixed results for the ACT quartiles achievement gap.

Several design features of the experiment mute the potential effectiveness of the flipped classroom model. We conducted the experiment for three class sessions. This could lead to an underestimation of the model's effect because it may have been disruptive for the treatment group to switch the class format without enough time to establish strong classroom norms. In addition, we expect that instructors would improve over time as they get used to implementing the new pedagogy. While it is a strength of our study design that we observe instructors in both the standard lecture and the flipped classroom, it means that instructors have to prepare two types of classes. This extra preparation may lead to lower-quality classes than if they focused on one type of lecture. Additionally, we did not allow faculty or students to select into the study. Those who prefer the new pedagogy might be better instructors and students in this model, as suggested by our survey results. Lastly, additional instructor training and support could improve the quality of implementation. Together, these constraints suggest that our findings could be a lower bound for the potential impacts of the flipped classroom. Our finding that the flipped classroom generates substantial gains in math—but widens the achievement gap—might also serve as a lower bound for the potential effects for longer implementations without these limitations.

Although the standardized nature of course content, teaching, and grading offers an ideal setting for a randomized control trial, West Point is a unique academic setting and our results might not generalize to other postsecondary institutions. On one hand, West Point's selective admissions criteria and small class sizes are comparable to selective liberal arts colleges. On the other hand, cadets at West Point and the predominantly military faculty who teach them might differ on unobservable dimensions from students and faculty at other colleges. In particular, West Point's emphasis on class attendance and classroom discipline could make flipped classroom instruction at West Point more effective (e.g., through increased participation) or less effective (e.g., if marginal cadets negatively influence their peers) than flipped classroom instruction in other settings. Considering our results, additional research on the impact of the flipped classroom model in more traditional postsecondary settings is clearly warranted.

We implement a clean flipped classroom experiment in a setting with real stakes and glean insights about this popular pedagogical model. The results of our experiment show that the flipped classroom can generate large learning gains in a short period of time and that implementation quality, instructor preferences, and student engagement likely play key roles in its effectiveness. We find substantial short-term effects in math and null effects for economics. Suggestive evidence points to a few potential explanations. First, instructors who preferred teaching the flipped classroom generated larger effects, suggesting that instructor interest contributes to the success of new pedagogical models. Second, we find higher levels of student engagement in math relative to economics: Math instructors report higher rates of students paying attention, asking questions, and working in groups and independently in class relative to the math control group and the economics treatment group. Also, math students rate the video more useful than economics students. Survey data also show that the math classrooms increased student engagement and student-teacher interactions more than the economics classrooms (perhaps those aspects are important for an effective flipped classroom implementation).

Despite the short-term effects in math, we find no longer-term gains in learning and the flipped classroom exacerbates the achievement gap instead of reducing it. Short-term gains in math are concentrated among male, white, and high-achieving students. The flipped classroom has a 69 percent larger racial achievement gap and a 23 percent larger baseline, academic ability achievement gap than the standard lecture, and these differences persist through the final exam. Combined, these findings suggest educators should exercise caution when implementing the flipped classroom.

Even with null long-term effects, educational institutions may still choose the flipped classroom model if it maintains average levels of learning, but at lower costs. Schools can reduce costs by using the flipped classroom model by hiring lower-skilled instructors, such as teaching assistants or tutors to facilitate the flipped classroom, and paying a one-time cost to produce high-quality videos by a skilled lecturer.

Special thanks go to the Math and Economics departments of the United States Military Academy for participating in the study. We also thank Sandra Black, Susan Dynarski, David Figlio, Joshua Goodman, Sarah Komisarow, Jonah Rockoff, and seminar participants at Tufts University, the United States Military Academy, the Northeast Economics of Education Workshop, the Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management, and the Western Economic Association for helpful comments. Setren was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the position of the United States Military Academy, the Department of the Army, or the Department of Defense.

See Lage, Platt, and Treglia ( 2000 ); Bergmann and Sams ( 2009 ); McLaughlin et al. ( 2014 ); Schultz et al. ( 2014 ); Findlay-Thompson and Mombourquette ( 2014 ); Davies, Dean, and Ball ( 2013 ); Overmyer ( 2014 ); Swoboda and Feiler ( 2016 ).

For example, if students observe increased retention after flipped classrooms, they might ask more follow-up questions or focus more of their study efforts on material from standard lectures to compensate. Wozny, Balser, and Ives ( 2018 ) produce a variety of robustness checks that suggest the teaching methods of previous lessons do not impact test scores from current lessons.

See table 1 of Carter, Greenberg, and Walker ( 2017 ) for a comparison of West Point to similarly ranked liberal arts colleges and to all four-year postsecondary institutions.

See https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/west-point-2893/overall-rankings .

The primary purpose of the financial literacy unit is to prepare students for managing a large (upwards of $30,000) loan they receive in the middle of their junior year. The loan gives students upfront capital to purchase life necessities (including vehicles, uniforms, and furniture) to begin their Army career.

As a backup, the videos were also loaded to YouTube and the instructors were informed of this alternate capability to help them troubleshoot viewing problems during execution of the experiment. We cannot track YouTube video watching except for student reported surveys.

For students who did not take the ACT, we map SAT scores to comparable ACT scores. The highest possible ACT score is 36, with 21 being the average score.

After randomizing classrooms to treatment and control groups, but before the start of the school year, the Math Department added an additional instructor. The Math Department assigned the new instructor to teach three sections that had been assigned to three separate math instructors in our experiment. These sections included two treatment and one control. We confirmed with the Math Department that our experiment had no bearing on the decision to bring in an additional instructor, including the decision about which sections the new instructor would teach. As a result of this swap, the three instructors who lost a section taught only one section and therefore had no variation in treatment and control sections during the experiment. We did not adjust the random assignment after this section swap occurred and we did not permit instructors to self-select their sections into treatment or control groups.

The columns in table 3 , panel A, do not need to add up to 100 percent because multiple activities can occur at the same time. For example, instructors can answer individual questions while students work in groups.

We measure percent of video watched by dividing the number of bytes downloaded by the total number of bytes for each lesson. If students streamed a lesson's video more than once, we take the session where they watched the largest proportion of the video. This conservatively measures student video watching by undercounting the proportion of the video watched if students do not restart from the beginning.

While self-reported data are not ideal, students knew their responses would not affect their grade or be viewed by their instructors. The average student responded that they spent 30 to 50 percent less time preparing for class than West Point suggests (2 hours per class, see panel A of table 5 ). This signals students’ willingness to give non-favorable answers. Furthermore, the flipped and standard classrooms did not have different incentives to over- or underreport their course preparation, so any measurement error should be consistent across the two groups.

Results with and without instructor fixed effects are also similar.

With only twenty-nine economics sections, our clustered standard errors for economics classes are potentially biased downwards. To investigate this further, table A.2 in the online appendix reports conventional standard errors, robust standard errors, and standard errors constructed from section-level unit-quiz means. The results of this investigation suggest that the marginally significant negative estimate among economics classrooms is indistinguishable from zero when we correct for the small number of clusters (column 4). Our positive estimates for math classrooms, however, are statistically significant regardless of how we estimate standard errors.

Data were not available to analyze rote versus problem-solving effects for economics.

The units that followed the experimental unit did not build upon knowledge from the experimental unit. Instructors did not spend time on the experimental unit's material after the quiz.

We also used the method suggested by Abadie, Chingos, and West ( 2018 ) to investigate the impact of the flipped classroom by how we predict students will score on the math quiz in the standard classroom. The results of this investigation are similar to our estimated treatment effects by ACT quartile: The flipped classroom boosts student performance for students whom we predict will score in the top of the distribution, but there are no gains for those in the bottom quartile. Results are available from the authors upon request.

We find no substantial differences in the student survey responses on class preparation or students’ views on the usefulness of the videos and readings that might explain these differential effects.

It is worth noting that this exacerbates the achievement gap among a relatively high-performing group of students who went through the selective West Point admissions process. In the 2017–18 admissions cycle, 25 percent of admitted applicants scored below 550 on the English section and 590 on the Math section of the SAT while the top quartile of admitted applicants scored above 660 and 690 on English and Math, respectively (West Point 2019 ).

Email alerts

Related articles, related book chapters, affiliations.

• Online ISSN 1557-3079
• Print ISSN 1557-3060

A product of The MIT Press

Mit press direct.

• About MIT Press Direct

Information

• Accessibility
• For Authors
• For Customers
• For Librarians
• Direct to Open
• Open Access
• Media Inquiries
• Rights and Permissions
• For Advertisers
• About the MIT Press
• The MIT Press Reader
• MIT Press Blog
• Seasonal Catalogs
• MIT Press Home
• Give to the MIT Press
• Direct Service Desk
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Statement
• Crossref Member
• COUNTER Member  
• The MIT Press colophon is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

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

28k Accesses

49 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

Turki Mesfer Alqahtani, Farrah Dina Yusop & Siti Hajar Halili

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

Rebecca S. L. Binnie & Stephen J. Bonsor

Nudge or not, university teachers have mixed feelings about online teaching

Sanchayan Banerjee, Beatriz Jambrina-Canseco, … Jenni Carr

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

Innovations in Flipping the Language Classroom pp 11–21 Cite as

Implementing the Flipped Classroom: Challenges and Strategies

• Anna F. Brown 3  
• First Online: 05 December 2017

2350 Accesses

7 Citations

The flipped classroom model holds both benefits and challenges for new adopters. A learner-centered instructional perspective supports the development of an effective flipped course. Instructors can assess their readiness for the conversion process and prepare for a smooth implementation by learning about the experiences and ideas of others. Instructors should also think through the readiness—both practical and conceptual—of their institution and students. Preparing students for the flipped model, and making use of their input when possible, eases the transition for all. Aspects of course design to consider include content format, in-class activities, and building connections between in-class and out-of-class components. Instructors have numerous options for content delivery, and can base their selections on multiple factors, including technological skill and available tools as well as student access and preference. Activity design can incorporate a variety of strategies, often making use of peer interaction and collaboration. Changes to instructional methods result in alternate teaching roles and shifts in the classroom environment. In addition, these changes warrant a fresh look at assessment methods, for students, instructors, and courses. Instructors who share their flipped classroom experience, from initial design to final data collection and evaluation, provide valuable learning for all.

• Flipped Classroom
• Flipped Course
• Flipped Model
• Upcoming Content
• Deliver Online Content

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

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

Google Scholar  

Reynolds, G. (2011). Presentation zen . San Francisco, CA, USA: New Riders Press.

Rothstein, D., & Santana, L. (2011). One resource for teaching this skill is make just one change. Teach students to ask their own questions . Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice . San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA, USA: ASCD.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Northwestern College, Chicago, USA

Anna F. Brown

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna F. Brown .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Freelance Instructional Designer, West Bend, Singapore

Jeff Mehring

Miyagi University of Education, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan

Adrian Leis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Brown, A.F. (2018). Implementing the Flipped Classroom: Challenges and Strategies. In: Mehring, J., Leis, A. (eds) Innovations in Flipping the Language Classroom. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6968-0_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6968-0_2

Published : 05 December 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-10-6967-3

Online ISBN : 978-981-10-6968-0

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Am J Pharm Educ
• v.80(2); 2016 Mar 25

Research, Perspectives, and Recommendations on Implementing the Flipped Classroom

Flipped or inverted classrooms have become increasingly popular, and sometimes controversial, within higher education. Many educators have touted the potential benefits of this model and initial research regarding implementation has been primarily positive. The rationale behind the flipped classroom methodology is to increase student engagement with content, increase and improve faculty contact time with students, and enhance learning. This paper presents a summary of primary literature regarding flipped classrooms, discusses concerns and unanswered questions from both a student and faculty member perspective, and offers recommendations regarding implementation.

INTRODUCTION

Changes in student demographics, the economic climate, and Internet technologies have made the contemporary educational environment different than it was even just a decade ago. As a result, many educators are examining newer models of instruction to produce successful graduates in today’s society. Although similar techniques and philosophies have existed for decades, the formal flipped or inverted classroom methodology is a contemporary approach to educational design. A simplified description of the flipped classroom is a reversal of the traditional order of content delivery (ie, lectures) and homework. Lage et al described the flipped classroom as one in which “events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa.” 1 Traditional lecture material is “offloaded” for students to learn outside of class, freeing classroom time for more enriching activities. 2 Flipped classrooms are not a panacea for all of higher education’s teaching woes, however when designed and implemented properly, they may offer several advantages over traditional didactic classroom environments. The ability to revisit recorded lectures, in-class application activities, and increased attention to concept application during class have been cited as popular aspects of flipped classrooms among students. 3

Learning theorists advocate that instructional strategies like those used in a flipped classroom enable students to learn and retain information better than through traditional lectures. 4 Removed from the constraints of “providing content,” instructors can add value to the classroom experience by teaching students how to reason through problems and apply information to real-life issues. Supporters of flipped classroom methodologies hypothesize that students will spend less class time browsing the Internet, daydreaming, or being distracted in other ways, and spend more time engaged in class applying information through problem-solving, case discussions, or other activities that require thoughtful processing of content. This article summarizes current literature regarding flipped classrooms, discusses the benefits and concerns from both a student and faculty perspective, and provides recommendations for faculty members considering implementing this instructional approach.

RATIONALE FOR IMPLEMENTING FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODELS

As educators begin to eschew the traditional lecture format as the preferred teaching method, a variety of reasons are appearing in the literature regarding why flipped classrooms are a better approach. These reasons primarily include alleviating academic bulimia, encouraging personal accountability, and improving student learning.

In traditional classrooms, students listen to a lecture and subsequently complete required assignments after the lecture. Although this may not be true of every student, course, or subject matter, lecturing may lure students into a ritual of memorizing and regurgitating information for upcoming examinations. 5 Often times, rather than truly learning the clinical application of the material, students resort to memorizing the presentation, purging the information on the examination, and ultimately failing to retain the information. 5 This subconscious student strategy otherwise known as “bulimic learning” 5-8 has been successful for many students throughout their academic careers, which is why they will often resort to it without even recognizing how detrimental it is to learning. 7

Instructors have long bemoaned that students come to class ill-prepared, without having completed homework or reading assignments. 9 Active learning activities, such as those in flipped classrooms, increase student accountability for class preparation and attendance. 10-12 Although not exclusive to flipped classrooms, in-class activities based on pre-assignments encourage students to complete assignments and attend class to further comprehend subject material. Implementing flipped classroom strategies can increase student perceptions that preclass activities are important and enhance in-class learning. 13

For any educational method to be considered successful, there must be evidence that student learning is enhanced. There are numerous examples of learning successes within other fields, 2,14,15 but research on flipped classroom methodologies in pharmacy education is still in its infancy and most of the studies regarding learning have been on a small scale within a single course or instructional module. Ferreri and O’Connor’s study involving pharmacy students in a patient self-care course found a steady improvement in students’ academic scores after implementing a flipped classroom model. 11 The year preceding the course redesign, there were 21 As, 66 Bs, 12 Cs, and one F. After course redesign, grade distributions improved significantly ( p <0.001) to 52 As, 44 Bs, four Cs and zero Fs. In their small study of a flipped classroom format for teaching a controlled substance module in a pharmacy law class, Michaud-Sacks et al revealed significant increases ( p <0.0001) in overall scores on knowledge and application quiz questions compared to the previous year. 16 In a basic pharmaceutics course, McLaughlin et al also showed that final examination scores (out of 200 points) were higher ( p =0.001) during the year in which a flipped classroom (165.48, n=162) was used compared to the previous year in which a traditional lecture format (160.06, n=153) was used. 17 Wong et al showed that compared to a control group of students (n=105) from the previous year who were in traditional class lectures for cardiac arrhythmias, first-year pharmacy students (n=101) who received instruction via a flipped teaching method had higher mean examination scores on pharmacology (89.6% vs 56.8%, p <0.001) and therapeutics (89.2% vs 73.7%, p <0.001) of cardiac arrhythmias. 18 Finally, Persky and Dupuis’s 8-year retrospective study of student performance revealed an increase in clinical pharmacokinetics course grades ( p <0.001) following a conversion of the course from a lecture plus active-learning model to flipped classroom type activities (team-based learning). 19

Not all designs have produced overwhelmingly positive results. Everly and Cochran compared two sections of students in a gastroenterology course lecture covering acute and chronic pancreatitis and found no significant differences on examination question performance between students in the traditional lecture section and the section using a flipped format. 20 Examination scores are often used as a proxy measure for learning; however, the ultimate goal is for students to be able to apply classroom learning to real-life situations, which is more difficult to assess.

FLIPPED CLASSROOM METHODOLOGIES

Numerous flipped classroom design possibilities exist, which makes it difficult to understand all the nuances of this approach. Kim et al identified nine crucial design principles for flipped classrooms ( Appendix 1 ). 21 Each of these principles follows a learner-centric teaching philosophy, which effectively incentivizes and guides students in their approach to learning. Some of the more salient principles are providing students an opportunity to gain first exposure to content prior to class, incentivizing them to prepare for class, and providing clear connection between in-class and out-of-class activities.

Similarly, Estes et al proposed a 3-stage, flipped classroom design framework consisting of preclass, in-class, and postclass learning activities. 22 Although methods may vary, preclass activities are typically readings, 11 short recorded video or audio lectures, or some other form of computer-based instruction. 13,23 When properly designed, preclass work should not contain excessive detail, but should cover primary learning points. 24 Students should be provided guidance regarding preclass learning activities. One example of this guidance is to inform students what they need to be able to do or know in advance of class, rather than simply instructing them to read a specific chapter or watch a video. 25 Much of the success of the flipped approach depends on the interplay between preclass and in-class activities. Off-loaded preclass content must be presented in a fashion that students can readily comprehend and, be tied directly to in-class application. 26 If the two components are disconnected or if students can “succeed” without attending to off-loaded content then little may be gained from the change.

In-class activities, the second stage of the framework, may consist of a variety of methods for clarifying preclass activity concepts including: quizzes given at the beginning of class, group learning activities, problem solving, case discussions, or other active-learning methods that apply to different learning types. 17,27,28 Anecdotal discussions of flipped classrooms often focus on the off-loaded content stage, but the in-class activities are arguably the most important instructional component and should be given considerable forethought and attention. Classroom time is valuable and should make the best use of instructor knowledge, experience, and abilities to assist students in learning how to think like a pharmacist. The focus of classroom learning sessions should not be on the presentation of content, but on maintaining active student engagement with material. 29

Although not used in every situation, postclass learning activities in flipped classroom formats usually involve learning assessments and further application of skills or knowledge. Similar to traditionally-taught courses, class projects, portfolios, examinations, and other forms of authentic assessment are often used to determine and document achieved course competencies. 22 These assessments are important not only to instructors, but for students who may need more feedback on their comprehension of material.

McLaughlin et al provided one example of a flipped classroom design in terms of off-loaded content and in-class activity for a basic pharmaceutics course. Course lectures were shortened, recorded, and made available online for students to view before class. In-class activities consisted of audience response and open questions, pair-and-share activities, student presentations, quizzes, and microlectures. 13 As stated previously, the concepts behind flipped classrooms are not entirely new. Other teaching methodologies used in pharmacy education follow the same philosophy, and instructors can often adapt the design and active-learning techniques for a flipped classroom approach. Blended-learning methods are closely associated with flipped classrooms because they both shift educational activity to online settings and reduce classroom time for lecture or other types of learning tasks. Blended-learning methods have been used successfully for years in pharmacy courses 26,30,31 and offer examples of successful learning activities. Team-based learning (TBL) is another example of a specific technique used throughout pharmacy education. 32 In TBL courses, students are responsible for preclass learning objectives, and class time is spent assessing knowledge and working in teams to complete a variety of activities. 19,33,34 Problem-based learning (PBL) is yet another example of a methodology in which classroom time is used for problem-solving in lieu of instructor lectures. 35

STUDENT PERSPECTIVES

Students accustomed to traditional didactic lectures may initially resist the concept of flipped classrooms because the onus of learning is shifted to them, 36 they perceive the workload will be too rigorous, 27 or they are anxious regarding potential classroom unsettledness. 1,24,37 An underlying fear of added workload and uncertainty of success is the basis for their concerns. These are legitimate fears rooted in years of familiarity with learning in traditional classroom environments and, therefore, may take considerable time to overcome. While early evidence suggests that this teaching method can be successful in promoting learning and other traits desired of students, it is not substantial enough to readily sway all students to this approach.

Students can have a different perception than faculty members regarding instructional strategies that require increased personal responsibility for learning. “Teaching ourselves” is a phrase commonly used negatively by students to describe instructional practices in which didactic lectures are limited and students must learn fundamental content on their own without considerable guidance from instructors. 38 This also leads students to believe they have “extra” work because they must complete all preclass activities to keep pace in the class. A third expressed fear among some students is that group discussions and problem-solving activities create an unsettled classroom (ie, a chaotic classroom environment in which students may feel lost). 10

Even with those fears, research of flipped classroom methodologies in other disciplines such as business, engineering, medicine, and nursing indicate that students typically respond favorably to this type of instruction after experiencing it. 1,36,39-42 Most students who experience flipped courses prefer an inverted class format containing hands-on, problem-solving activities in class as opposed to a traditional lecture format. 38 Although research in pharmacy education is sparse, results from the few existing studies are consistent with those from other disciplines. In a pharmaceutics course delivered to 22 students on two satellite campus, 89.5% of students preferred the flipped format after completing the course compared to 34.6% before the course. 13 Survey results of pharmacy student (N=64) perceptions of flipped learning within another pharmaceutics course indicated that students favored flipped learning over a traditional lecture design. 43 Similarly, pharmacy students (N=286) in a flipped nonprescription drugs/self-care course were surveyed regarding teaching and delivery styles. Following course completion, 30% (n=86) favored the flipped format, 48% (n=137) favored a combination of flipped and traditional formats, and 19% (n=54) favored traditional lecture format. 28

McLaughlin et al’s survey research of students (N=162) in a required first-year pharmaceutics course revealed significant differences between precourse and postcourse attitudes toward the flipped classroom learning environment. Preferences for the flipped classroom approach increased from 27.3% (n=41) prior to the course to 84.6% (n=126) after the course. Furthermore, attendance was higher in the flipped classroom ( p <0.05) compared to the previous year. 13 Pierce and Fox found that student perceptions regarding a flipped classroom renal pharmacotherapy module were also favorable, with 80% (n=42) of students indicating the module increased their efficacy for the final examination and 62% (n=32) indicating a desire for more instructors to use this form of teaching. 44

Wong et al’s study revealed that student perceptions of effectiveness of preclass lecture materials followed by in-class case-based exercises for teaching cardiac arrhythmias varied according to the topical area. Sixty-three percent (n=43) strongly agreed that those methods were more effective than traditional methods for learning therapeutics. However, only a minority of students were in favor of flipped classroom methods for the basic sciences (35%, n=24) and pharmacology (13%, n=9). One potential explanation for the negative perceptions was student concerns regarding the excessive length of the pharmacology recordings. 18

CONSIDERATIONS AND QUESTIONS

Similar to other instructional approaches, a number of philosophical, technical, and logistical issues must be considered when implementing flipped classroom methodologies. Many educators advocate flipped classroom methods and extoll the virtues of how these methods can engage students in their own learning processes, add value to classroom time, and improve overall learning outcomes. 12,24,45-48 Initially, however, some faculty members are reluctant to adopt such strategies for a variety of reasons. Some are unsure of what they will do during class time and fear they will be unable to deliver the material adequately, 48 especially to large enrollment classes. 49 Some fear the increased time required to implement the method. 1,11 Others cite caution with regard to accepting the value of technology-enabled strategies. 48

Converting from a traditional classroom teaching environment to a flipped classroom environment is not always easy. Initial development of learning materials for a flipped classroom may require a significant time investment by faculty members. 17 A flipped classroom design for a pharmaceutics course required 127% more faculty time to implement than in the previous year’s traditional lecture format, but that time was expected to decrease once the course was established. 13 Moreover, after the initial offering of a redesigned self-care pharmacy course, time spent planning lectures returned to the same level as before the redesign year. 11

Like other forms of nonlecture-driven education, logistical issues should be considered before implementation. First, instructors should be cognizant of time requirements necessary for students to adequately complete out-of-class assignments. Faculty members must determine appropriate levels of students’ out-of-class work, especially with condensed courses (ie, those taught over a shorter time period such as a 4-week summer course) and/or an entire curricula of flipped courses. Communication among all instructors for a student cohort may be required to prevent unreasonable amounts of “homework.” Flexibility of access is one of the positive aspects of off-loading content, but students can be disadvantaged if instructors collectively assign too much content, do not provide adequate lead time, or put time restrictions on when assignments such as quizzes can be completed. Out-of-class assignments may need to be limited and/or fewer in-class sessions required for students to adequately prepare. For example, instructors for a redesigned first-year pharmaceutics course converted 29 hours of lecture into 14.4 hours of self-paced recorded videos that prepared students for the in-class learning activities. They deemed this reduction in lecture hours necessary to allow for ideal student preparation and to emphasize only the most critical concepts. 13

Course enrollment sizes should also be factored into design considerations. Methods used in flipping smaller courses may not be as feasible with large class enrollments, however advocates maintain that flipped classrooms can still benefit all course sizes. 13-15,24,36,50 It may be more difficult to design and facilitate effective in-class activities for larger classrooms, but instructors have numerous options. The use of group and team-based learning activities is the most common example, but there are a variety of other ways to interact with a large classroom of students. 11 Classroom discussions, the use of student response clickers, and case studies allow students to be individually accessible throughout physical class time. 50 Forms of digital technology, such as learning management systems, can also be used for individual assignments or in-class quizzes. 51

Because formal flipped classroom methods are relatively new to higher education, research regarding their effectiveness has only recently become available in the literature. Although the literature informs educators of the benefits of using flipped classroom methodologies, several questions remain unanswered and deserve further study.

One question for programs that institute a curriculum-wide flipped classroom approach is determining if there are different/new characteristics that predict student success. Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT) scores and grade point averages (GPA) have long been considered the primary predictors of student success in pharmacy curricula. 52-54 However, those are primarily knowledge-based criteria and ones in which content memorization and test-taking skills can lead to success. Because classroom activities (and presumably assessments) in flipped classrooms require more problem-solving and application skills, content memorization and test-taking skills may be insufficient. Perhaps schools need to examine other nonquantitative student characteristics such as intellectual curiosity, personal responsibility, reasoning skills, etc., in order to identify and admit students most likely to succeed.

Another question that may be of concern to faculty members is if graduates of flipped classrooms will still possess understanding of fundamental pharmacy “facts.” The flipped classroom philosophy eschews spending class time on knowledge-based content in favor of higher-order thinking and problem solving. Theoretically, students will still need to learn that material through preclass assignments to perform well in class, but some fear that memorization of fundamental knowledge and facts will be lost with teaching methods that focus on critical thinking and problem solving. Research in this area is still too new to reveal any positive or negative long-term effects. A similar question is whether flipped classrooms improve the problem-solving and critical-thinking skills they are hypothesized to and how that will be assessed.

A final question that remains unanswered is whether there are strategies and techniques within flipped classrooms that are either easier to implement or are more effective than others. One of the difficulties that faculty members appear to have with course redesign is determining exactly what to choose from the seemingly infinite numbers of options for in-class activities. As more research is conducted, strategies need to be studied so that best practices can be developed with regard to off-loaded content, technologies, in-class activities, and assessment.

OVERCOMING RESISTENCE TO THE FLIPPED CLASSROOM

Although traditional lectures are removed from flipped classrooms, they are not without value. At the right time, for the right purpose, by the right instructor, lectures can be a valuable form of teaching, but they should not be the only or primary form of teaching in today's educational environment. It should also be recognized that many instructors have already abandoned the lecture in favor of more active-learning activities within the classroom. The advantages of flipped classrooms can be experienced through the addition of hands-on, problem-solving activities. Flipped classrooms are the next step in that evolution and as with most changes, there are both concerns and benefits.

While flipped classroom teaching methods offer several advantages to educators, haphazard implementation will almost surely result in disgruntled faculty members or students and a compromised learning environment. As the literature indicates, there are a variety of issues to consider when instituting a dramatic change in teaching approach. This paradigm change reflects a shift in what it means to be a teacher and a student. Although most reports indicate that faculty members and students appreciate the change after it has occurred, several years of ingrained habits and beliefs must be overcome. Both faculty members and students may need convincing that the change will be beneficial.

Students whose perception that learning only occurs while listening to an instructor lecture may initially complain that flipped classroom teaching methods equate to students teaching themselves while faculty members stand idly by. 38 There may even be some faculty members who reject the idea that students can learn without actually hearing/seeing the instructor tell them. A common student misperception about flipped classrooms is that students learn completely on their own without guidance and support from faculty members. 39 Both parties would have legitimate complaints if those perceptions were accurate. However, flipped classrooms do not involve less of a teaching commitment from instructors. They actually may require more teaching, interaction, and communication. That teaching may look and sound differently than what some have experienced, but the guidance and support required by instructors is crucial, and in reality, is probably closer to how faculty members prefer to teach and be taught.

Students may be more accountable for their own learning in flipped classrooms, but that does not necessarily mean an increased workload. 1 For some students, workload may increase but only to the extent that is already expected by instructors. Strategies for studying may need to change because “coming to class prepared to learn” will mean more than being punctual and ready to take notes. For some students, this format may better align with how they prefer to learn, which is to obtain and study basic content on their own and use class time for interacting with the instructor, the content, and their classmates.

Student opposition to an abrupt transition in classroom dynamics from traditional lecture to a flipped classroom is understandable. In essence, this is changing the rules for how one becomes successful in a course. Spending considerable amounts of time memorizing content, “cramming” for tests, and then forgetting much of it postexamination, may no longer work when reasoning and rationale becomes paramount. Time spent in the classroom is an opportunity for students to better understand the reasoning, rather than the means of receiving information. Although some students may initially resist these changes, it is incumbent upon pharmacy educators to move students toward self-directed learning that prepares students for their future beyond pharmacy school. 55

Changing to a flipped classroom paradigm may actually be more bothersome to faculty members than to students. Some faculty members may struggle with releasing the reliance on their role as content-deliverer, especially if they have been considered by themselves or others to be a “great teacher.” Those faculty members should be encouraged to focus on the value they bring to the classroom and to offer something that students cannot get by reading a book or watching a video. Those who are truly great at teaching will adapt and continue to be as good or perhaps even better teachers regardless of the teaching environment.

The transition to a flipped environment will involve additional work on behalf of faculty members. 13,17 The return on investment of faculty time is a big consideration. However, time investment should not be viewed merely as “extra work,” but as potential quality improvement measures expected of any professional. Like other forms of quality improvement, the increased work is realized early in the development phase, but theoretically returns to “normal levels” in subsequent years.

As with any new strategy, implementation and execution are important components of this teaching philosophy. Educational environments may vary widely with regard to class sizes, educational philosophies, human and technical resources, and student composition. These are all important elements of any curriculum and add to the complexity of evaluating educational methods. Not all flipped classrooms “look the same,” and the success of each depends upon appropriate instructional design to achieve desired outcomes. Providing faculty members with educational development opportunities on how to successfully utilize flipped classroom methods is vital, 56 as is providing sufficient time and technical and human resources to implement the approach.

The actual design of any flipped classroom is crucial and perhaps an area of trepidation for faculty members considering a redesign. Because most faculty members did not experience this type of teaching as a student, they may have difficulty comprehending what it should actually look like. Instructional designers or learning experts should be involved with topic, module, and course design in order to avoid pitfalls and realize the full potential of this methodology. Faculty members must avoid creating another form of instruction in which most students can “hide” and still be successful. One of the more important and perhaps controversial aspects of a flipped classroom paradigm is that faculty members must allow students to fail if they do not take personal responsibility for their learning. Faculty members should make efforts to reach students who are struggling or who seek guidance, but enabling students who do not take it upon themselves to comprehend foundational concepts is detrimental to their development as professionals.

Finally, assessment methods may also need to change. Teaching for application but testing primarily for knowledge will lead to dissonance and likely result in student dissatisfaction. As with other forms of teaching, students should be tested how they are taught. Students will always adjust their personal learning habits to the incentives of grades, and faculty members should ensure that as much as possible, grades reflect the knowledge, skills, and attitudes we desire. Existing research provides best practices on implementation of flipped classroom methodologies. Appendix 2 offers a series of summarized recommendations for faculty members considering a transition to flipped classroom teaching.

Benjamin Franklin once stated, “Tell me and I forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I learn.” 57 Franklin’s quote embodies the core of the flipped classroom concept. When properly implemented, flipped classroom environments are primarily a positive experience for both faculty members and student pharmacists who learn to appreciate the increased engagement. The ever-evolving landscape of health care requires a curriculum that enables students to think through problem situations and enter the workforce confident in their ability to provide high-quality patient-centered care. Medical educators have even recommended that the flipped classroom philosophy form the foundation of a new model of medical education. Biomedical information is advancing faster than can be taught and students possess the digital skills to learn outside the classroom, therefore the proposed model should be one in which only foundational content be covered, while the rest of instruction concentrates on developing deeper intellectual and medical thinking skills necessary to operate in this new age. 41

Rapid advancements in technology have made flipped classrooms possible by making fundamental facts and knowledge available for student review before actual class time. In doing so, class time can be focused on applying conceptual material in real-life clinical settings and learning how to “think like a pharmacist.” Flipped classrooms may be initially met with resistance by students and faculty members alike, but the opportunities to improve teaching and learning practices should not be ignored. Students deserve to be taught in a way that best prepares them to practice within a highly demanding work environment. The principles behind flipped classrooms are designed to accomplish that.

Published research regarding flipped classrooms in pharmacy education is increasing, but much more is needed to substantiate this method as a preferred way of teaching and learning. In particular, educators need access to research-proven methods that can be duplicated in other courses. The almost limitless design possibilities may seem daunting to faculty members considering this method of teaching, and the academy would benefit from a white paper that provides best practices and detailed implementation guidance.

Appendix 1. Nine Design Principles for the Flipped Classroom

• 1. Provide an opportunity for students to gain first exposure to content prior to class
• 2. Provide an incentive for students to prepare for class
• 3. Provide a mechanism to assess student understanding
• 4. Provide clear connections between in-class and out-of-class activities
• 5. Provide clearly defined and well-structured guidance
• 6. Provide enough time for students to complete the assignments
• 7. Provide facilitation for building a learning community
• 8. Provide prompt/adaptive feedback on individual or group works
• 9. Provide technologies familiar and easy to access

Appendix 2. Recommendations for Implementing a Flipped Classroom

• 1. Use instructional designers to determine what content should be offloaded and how in-class learning activities should be designed
• 2. Provide numerous individual and group-based faculty development opportunities to assist faculty members in the paradigm change
• 3. Recognize that the increased nature of classroom dynamics may result in the need for additional personnel (eg, faculty members, graduate assistants, residents) in the classroom
• 4. Recognize that “changing the rules” will cause angst among many students who may themselves need to be re-educated on how one is successful in flipped classrooms
• 5. Link all preclass and in-class activities so it is necessary for students to complete both to be successful
• 6. Provide guidance to students so they understand exactly what they need to know or be able to do when they come to class
• 7. Provide an opportunity for students to ask questions and/or clarify information contained in off-loaded course materials
• 8. Focus in-class activities on ways that you can add value in helping students think like experts
• 9. Provide formative assessment opportunities for students to understand what they do and do not know
• 10. Resist the urge to “reteach” content to students who do not prepare accordingly. Be prepared to let them fail in order for them to comprehend what it means to be accountable as a professional
• 11. Be careful not to burden students with too much off-loaded content
• 12. Assess knowledge, skills, behaviors, and attitudes that you desire from students. Do not teach critical thinking and problem solving, but test only for knowledge
• 13. Be prepared to adjust teaching and learning activities as you discover what contributed to learning and what did not

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORT article

A study on flipped learning concerning learning motivation and learning attitude in language learning.

• 1 Department of Business Administration, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
• 2 Department of Hospitality Management, Ming Chuan University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
• 3 Department of Food and Beverage Management, Taipei University of Marine Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

From the popularity of flipped teaching in United States primary and high schools, it is thought that students have more learning control to adjust to the learning progress and are assisted in problem solving and learning guidance during class period. It is believed that flipped teaching could prompt underachieving learners’ active learning and thereby enhance learning effectiveness. A total of 386 high school students in Chungli, Taiwan, were part of an experimental study and the research results are summarized below: (1) Students who participated in the flipped teaching models demonstrated better comprehension levels with the teaching content due to this change in learning style and attitude, which in turn, enhanced learning effectiveness. (2) To eliminate poor language performance of underachieving students, it is necessary to lay solid foundations to gradually enhance language learning effectiveness regarding this particular group of students. Films suitable for students’ individual ability could be combined with new language learned in the unit to genuinely assist underachieving learners’ language learning effectiveness. (3) For students who care about their performance, a “system of play” style grouping should be determined in order to enable the tracking of group performance and term performance. According to the results, further developments regarding active learning ability, boosts in learning interests, enhanced learning effectiveness, and the prompting of creativity resulting in a shift from passive learner to active learner have been proposed.

Introduction

Due to serious global competition, countries throughout the world are positively changing their domestic education models to enhance national competitiveness. In education reform policies, the use of technology or e-learning has become prevalent. In this way, domestic educational initiatives are provided equally regardless of socioeconomic status and region; the principle of teaching students in accordance with aptitude expects to provide learning styles suitable for students with distinct intelligence. Traditional teaching sites are limited to instructors and teaching hours which can make it difficult to achieve the goals of teaching without partiality and teaching students in accordance with aptitude. E-learning is not restricted to time and space and could precede individualized instruction. In addition to thinking of teachers’ techniques, different levels of ability to teach students are also considered in various countries. According to current education goals in the world, it is of primary importance to cultivate students’ reading ability, mathematical ability, and scientific literacy, encourage cooperation with others, and develop problem-solving abilities.

In order to help slow learners or students not able to keep up due to missing classes, teachers introduced a new teaching approach in their lessons, aiming to have more adaptive classes; students could adjust to the learning progress according to their personal learning pace. Teachers first record the full lessons for students learning at home; the major course content is covered in the teaching films. Task-based learning activity or learning content questioning and discussion are preceded in the classroom. Teachers do not lecture like in formally structured lessons of the past but instead focus mainly on teacher–student interaction. In this manner of teaching, lots of time is allocated for group discussion, homework guidance, and critical thinking in class; besides adaptive instruction could be preceded for guiding slow learners. Such a teaching method is known as flipped teaching.

Chukwuemeka et al. (2021) stated that while suffering from COVID-19, many countries decided to give distance learning a try. Ways of getting an education have had to modify due to the epidemic crisis, but it also sheds some new light on education. It helps teachers to think out of the box and provide a more diversified way of teaching. The range of e-learning has crept up and shown its advantage during COVID-19. The pandemic has brought not only crisis to humans, but also chances ( Nerantzi, 2020 ). We live in a modern society with computers, the internet, and artificial intelligence constantly developing. In the process of producing e-learning teaching materials, flipped learning shows a different technical mean and education method from the traditional ones. It can be seen that students sing the praises of the contents of e-learning and the teachers’ wisdom and responsibilities ( Drozdikova-Zaripova and Sabirova, 2020 ). The concerned departments of education gather teachers with e-learning experience to record video courses of online teaching introduction and online flipped teaching implementation guidelines for students that are in home quarantine during the epidemic prevention period. They also collect e-learning resources, platforms, and tools for teachers and students, so that they can arrange the course or self-study ( Umutlu and Akpinar, 2020 ).

Flipped learning in language learning induces the learning interests and more effectively enhances the learning effectiveness and inspires creativity in changing passive learners into active learners.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

Chang and Hwang (2018) regarded the main value of flipped classroom as changing class hours into the form of a workshop and having students test their application knowledge through inquiry and mutual discussion. Hence, teachers become coaches or consultants encouraging students to participate in group discussion or individual inquiry. Therefore, flipped learning could better enhance students’ learning motivation and attitude than traditional teaching. Bakla (2018) explained it as promoting students’ active learning, including textbook text reading, taking preview notes, establishing Google teacher–student collaboration platforms, asking students to view teaching films in advance, establishing Facebook communities or groups for teacher–student discussion, and establishing an online evaluation system for students’ answering or filling in self-learning checklists. The results revealed the promotion of students’ learning effectiveness and learning motivation. Lin et al. (2018) combined a flipped classroom with mobile learning for mathematics teaching in elementary schools. The results showed that flipped learning, in comparison with traditional teaching, enhanced students’ learning interests and motivation as well as promoted students’ learning effectiveness; meanwhile, teachers and students presented a positive evaluation concerning the advantages of flipped learning. The following hypothesis is therefore proposed in this study.

H1: Flipped learning would affect learning motivation.

Zhang (2019) proposed a flipped classroom and requested that students read textbooks, handouts, or PPT before the class to preview relevant data in the lesson; a lot of class time was then saved for students asking questions and analyzing cases. Such a learning style received students’ positive support to prove that students preferred the learning style of the flipped classroom, compared to traditional learning styles. Aiming at teachers with the practice of flipped learning, Alexander (2018) considered that flipping enhanced job satisfaction and students made progress in learning performance. Moreover, teachers noted the obvious improvement of students’ learning attitude; some pleased teachers revealed that they would continuously apply the flipped learning model. Karabulut et al. (2018) indicated that the effectiveness of flipped learning was not simply on academic performance but could also enhance cooperation and thinking among students; meanwhile, it could change students’ attitude toward learning and teacher–student interaction. Many teachers therefore would like to apply these new teaching methods. In this case, the following hypothesis is proposed and testified in view of the present study.

H2: Flipped learning would affect learning attitude.

Chen et al. (2019) proposed the positive correlation between learning motivation and learning attitude; when learning motivation was not satisfied, good learning attitude would not be forthcoming. Awidi and Paynter (2019) regarded positive correlations between learners’ learning motivation and learning attitude, i.e., the stronger the learning motivation, the higher the learning attitude of learners. Green (2019) found that the higher the learning motivation, the higher the learning attitude; learning motivation presented predictability on learning attitude, which was not only the indicator of learning attitude and learning outcome, but also the main indicator to induce learning motivation and curriculum development. Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed and testified in view of the present study.

H3: Learning motivation presents significant and positive effects on the cognition component of learning attitude.

H4: Learning motivation presents significant and positive effects on the affection component of learning attitude.

H5: Learning motivation presents significant and positive effects on behavioral tendency in learning attitude.

Research Method

Measurement of research variables, learning motivation.

Referring to Chang et al. (2019) , learning motivation is divided into intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation in this study. In the Likert 7-point scale, 1 refers to extremely disagree and 7 refers to extremely agree. The overall reliability coefficients of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation appear to be 0.86 and 0.85, respectively.

Learning Attitude

Referring to Cheng and Tsai (2019) , learning attitude contains a cognition component, affection component, and behavioral tendency with a Likert 7-points scale, 1 refers to the response of extremely disagree and 7 refers to the response of extremely agree. The overall reliability coefficients of learning attitude show 0.82 for the cognition component, 0.81 for the affection component, and 0.89 for behavioral tendency.

Research Object and Sampling Data

With experimental research, 386 high school students in Taiwan completed the 16-week (3 h per week for a total of 48 h) flipped learning. The data collected through questionnaires were analyzed with SPSS and further analysis of variance and regression analysis were utilized for testing the formulated hypotheses.

Statistical Tools Used

In this study, analysis of variance was applied to discuss the difference of flipped learning in learning motivation and learning attitude, and regression analysis was used for understanding the relationship between learning motivation and learning attitude of high school students.

Analysis of Data and Testification of Hypotheses

Effects of flipped learning on learning motivation and learning attitude, differential analysis of flipped learning in learning motivation.

We can see from Table 1 that the difference of flipped learning in learning motivation reveals a significant difference of flipped learning in intrinsic orientation, where flipped learning (4.33) shows a higher level of intrinsic orientation than traditional teaching (3.64) and similarly, flipped learning (4.18) shows a higher level of extrinsic orientation than traditional teaching (3.77). Hence, H1 is supported.

Table 1. Differential analysis of flipped learning in learning motivation.

Difference Analysis of Flipped Learning in Learning Attitude

It is inferred from Table 2 that the difference of flipped learning in learning attitude reveals a remarkable difference of flipped learning in the cognition component, where flipped learning (4.24) shows a higher level of the cognition component than traditional teaching (3.58), likewise flipped learning (4.05) shows a higher level of the affection component than traditional teaching (3.35), and similarly, flipped learning (4.46) shows a higher level of behavioral tendency than traditional teaching (3.98). Hence, H2 is supported.

Table 2. Differential analysis of flipped learning in learning attitude.

Relationship Between Learning Motivation and Learning Attitude

Relationship between learning motivation and cognition component.

It is learnt from Table 3 that the results of regression analysis reveal a notable effect of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.287 ∗∗ ) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.436 ∗∗ ) on the cognition component of learning attitude. Hence, H3 is supported.

Table 3. Relationship between learning motivation and learning attitude.

Relationship Between Learning Motivation and Affection Component

It is understood from Table 3 that the results of regression analysis reveal significant effects of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.155 ∗∗ ) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.217 ∗∗ ) on the affection component of learning attitude. Hence, H4 is supported.

Relationship Between Learning Motivation and Behavioral Tendency

It is inferred from Table 3 that the results of regression analysis reveal remarkable effects of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.382 ∗∗ ) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.537 ∗∗ ) on behavioral tendency of learning attitude. Hence H5 is supported.

Results of the Study

The results of the study reveal that the students who were taught using “flipped teaching models” demonstrate better levels of comprehension due to changes in learning style and attitude in the flipped classroom, which enhances their effectiveness in learning language than their counter arts who received traditional teaching.

The results of the differential analyses with regard to the dimensions of “learning motivation” reveal that there is a remarkable difference indicating that the flipped learning group possessed higher levels of intrinsic orientation (4.33) and extrinsic orientation (4.18) than the traditional learning group (3.64 and 3.77), respectively, in their “learning motivation.”

The results of the differential analyses with regard to the dimensions of “learning attitude” reveal that there is a remarkable difference indicating that the flipped learning group possessed higher levels of the cognition component (4.24), affection component (4.05), and behavior tendency (4.46) than the traditional learning group (3.58, 3.35, and 3.98), respectively, in their “learning attitude”.

The results of the regression analyses with regard to the effects of “learning motivation” on “learning attitude” are that (i) there are remarkable positive effects of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.287) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.436) on the cognition component of learning attitude, (ii) there are remarkable positive effects of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.155) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.217) on the affection component of learning attitude, and (iii) there are remarkable positive effects of intrinsic orientation (β = 2.382) and extrinsic orientation (β = 2.537) on behavioral tendency of learning attitude. While comparing the “adjusted R 2 values,” it is found that the effects of intrinsic orientation and extrinsic orientation of learning motivation on behavioral tendency (0.342) are greater than that of the cognitive component (0.248) and affection component (0.314) of “learning attitude”.

Students’ low performance on language occurs slowly over time. In this case, a series of basic teaching initiatives are required to enhance low-performance students’ language learning effectiveness step by step. Instructors could allocate suitable films with new language learned in the unit according to students’ individual ability to help low-performance learners’ language learning effectiveness. Students from different levels generating discussions in the same group could easily result in “hitchhike.” In this case, group competition could be used in real teaching for students who care about their performance to be able to balance the group performance. In this case, students with better performance are willing to help low-performance students attain better learning motivation and learning attitude.

The research results show notable differences in language learning between the experimental group and the control group after the experimental teaching. Students in the experimental group present significantly higher language learning motivation and attitude than those in the control group. It reveals that flipped learning could help low-performance students enhance language learning effectiveness. In other words, flipped learning, compared to traditional teaching, could enhance students’ learning motivation and learning attitude and because of these reasons flipped learning is certainly worth attempting. However, traditional teaching also maintains some advantages for it to remain and be alternatively used with flipped learning. With flipped learning, students feel that the teaching content is easier to learn and internalize. Furthermore, flipped learning allows students to discuss topics with each other and teachers to guide their learning.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Ethics Statement

The present study was conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the Ethics Committee of Chung Yuan Christian University, with written informed consent being obtained from all the participants. All the participants were asked to read and approved the ethical consent form before participating in the present study. The participants were also asked to follow the guidelines in the form in the research. The research protocol was approved by the Ethical Committee of Chung Yuan Christian University.

Author Contributions

C-PC performed the initial analyses and wrote the manuscript. K-WC and C-JH assisted in the data collection and data analysis. All authors revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the reviewers for their valuable comments.

Alexander, M. M. (2018). The flipped classroom: engaging the student in active learning. J. Legal. Stud. Educ. 35, 277–300. doi: 10.1111/jlse.12078

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Awidi, I. T., and Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Comput. Educ. 128, 269–283. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.013

Bakla, A. (2018). Learner-generated materials in a flipped pronunciation class: a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Comput. Educ. 125, 14–38. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.017

Chang, C. Y., Sung, H. Y., Guo, J. L., Chang, B. Y., and Kuo, F. R. (2019). Effects of spherical video-based virtual reality on nursing students’ learning performance in childbirth education training Interactive Learn. Environ 27, 1–17. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1661854

Chang, S. C., and Hwang, G. J. (2018). Impact of an augmented reality-based flipped learning guiding approach on students’ scientific project performance and perceptions. Comput. Educ. 125, 226–239. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.007

Chen, M. R. A., Hwang, G. J., and Chang, Y. Y. (2019). A reflective thinking−promoting approach to enhancing graduate students’ flipped learning engagement, participation behaviors, reflective thinking and project learning outcomes. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 50, 2288–2307. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12823

Cheng, K. H., and Tsai, C. C. (2019). A case study of immersive virtual field trips in an elementary classroom: Students’ learning experience and teacher-student interaction behaviors. Comput. Educ. 140:103600.

Google Scholar

Chukwuemeka, E. J., Dominic, S., Kareem, M. A., and Mailafia, I. A. (2021). Redesigning educational delivery systems: the needs and options for continuous learning during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in nigeria. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 13:e292. doi: 10.30935/cedtech/9363

Drozdikova-Zaripova, A. R., and Sabirova, E. G. (2020). Usage of digital educational resources in teaching students with application of “Flipped classroom” technology. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 12:e278. doi: 10.30935/cedtech/8582

Green, L. S. (2019). Flipped learning environments: an introduction for librarians who design and teach. Lib. Technol. Rep. 55, 11–16.

Karabulut, I. A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N., and Jahren, C. T. (2018). A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 49, 398–411. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12548

Lin, C. J., Hwang, G. J., Fu, Q. K., and Chen, J. F. (2018). A flipped contextual game-based learning approach to enhancing EFL student’s English business writing performance and reflective behaviors. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 21, 117–131.

Nerantzi, C. (2020). The use of peer instruction and flipped learning to support flexible blended learning during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Manage. Appl. Res. 7, 184–195.

Umutlu, D., and Akpinar, Y. (2020). Effects of different video modalities on writing achievement in flipped english classes. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 12:e270. doi: 10.30935/cedtech/7993

Zhang, S. L. (2019). Chinese-as-a-foreign-language learners’ use of self-regulated learning in flipped/blended learning environments - a descriptive study. Stud. Self Access Learn. J. 10, 181–204. doi: 10.37237/100205

Keywords : flipped learning, language learning, learning motivation, learning attitude, cognition component, affection component, behavioral tendency

Citation: Chou C-P, Chen K-W and Hung C-J (2021) A Study on Flipped Learning Concerning Learning Motivation and Learning Attitude in Language Learning. Front. Psychol. 12:753463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.753463

Received: 04 August 2021; Accepted: 27 August 2021; Published: 22 September 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Chou, Chen and Hung. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Kuo-Wei Chen, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Open access
• Published: 12 January 2022

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

• Janique Oudbier 1 ,
• Gerard Spaai 1 ,
• Karline Timmermans 1 &
• Tobias Boerboom 1  

BMC Medical Education volume  22 , Article number:  34 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

9545 Accesses

42 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

In a flipped classroom, students acquire knowledge before class and deepen and apply this knowledge during class. This way, lower-order learning goals are achieved before class and higher-order skills are reached during class. This study aims to provide an overview of the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and how these factors can be stimulated. The effectiveness of the flipped classroom is conceptualized in this study as test scores, the achievement of higher learning goals, and student perceptions.

A state-of-the-art review was conducted. The databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were consulted. The timeframe is 2016 till 2020. The studies were qualitatively analyzed according to the grounded theory method.

After screening the studies based on the inclusion-and exclusion criteria, 88 studies were included in this review. The qualitative analysis of these studies revealed six main factors that affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom: student characteristics, teacher characteristics, implementation, task characteristics, out-of-class activities, and in-class activities. Mediating factors are, amongst other factors, the learner’s level of self-regulated learning, teacher’s role and motivation, assessment approach, and guidance during self-study by means of prompts or feedback. These factors can be positively stimulated by structuring the learning process and focusing the teacher training on competencies and learning-and teaching approaches that are essential for the flipped classroom.

This paper provides insight into the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and how these factors could be stimulated. In order to stimulate the effectiveness of the flipped classroom, the positively and negatively affecting factors and mediating factors should be taken into account in the design of the flipped classroom. The interventions mentioned in this paper could also be used to enhance the effectiveness.

Peer Review reports

In a flipped classroom, the learning process of the traditional classroom is reversed. During out-of-class activities students acquire knowledge and this knowledge is deepened and applied during in-class activities. In this way, the lower-order learning goals are achieved before class and the higher-order learning goals are reached during class under the guidance of a teacher. Lower order learning goals are for example, the recall of facts and the understanding of information, whereas higher learning goals are amongst other skills the solving of problems and making choices based on the analysis of information [ 76 ]. Flipped classroom often uses a blended learning approach. Blended learning integrates different forms of learning, such as face-to-face learning and online learning [ 28 ].

In health science education lectures are still a common form of instruction. However, Mehta et al. [ 58 ] stated that most current health science education is inefficient, inflexible, and lacks student-centeredness. Furthermore, they underlined that learning is often focused on performance, instead of the development of competencies. Therefore, they mentioned that it is time for a new paradigm for medical education [ 58 ]. The need to focus more on educational approaches that support the learner to process information is also underlined by van der Vleuten and Driessen [ 89 ]. They consider flipped classroom as a great educational approach to enable student-centered learning [ 89 ].

The effectiveness of the educational approach flipped classroom in health science education has been extensively studied in recent years. Hew and Lo [ 37 ] have conducted a meta-analysis on the improvement of student learning in health science education using a flipped classroom approach compared to a traditional classroom. They define traditional classroom as follow: “the approach of having students come to class during which teachers use a range of pedagogical strategies (e.g., lecture, case discussion, student presentation), and then students complete most of their homework after school”. Student learning is defined in this study as the difference in performance before and after the flipped classroom ([ 37 ], p. 2). This study showed that flipped classroom has a significant positive effect on student learning compared to a traditional classroom, and that students prefer flipped classroom over traditional classroom. Chen et al. [ 17 ] have conducted a meta-analysis on the academic outcomes of flipped classroom learning. This study showed that student achievement is higher in a flipped classroom than in a lecture-based classroom. Student achievement in this study is defined as course grades or examination scores.

Although the effectiveness of the educational approach flipped classroom in health science education is studied, a qualitative review that provides an overview of the factors that contribute to its effectiveness and how these factors could be stimulated is lacking. Therefore, this review presents an overview of the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom, the mediating factors, and interventions to stimulate the effectiveness. These insights can be used to effectively implement the flipped classroom in a curriculum.

Research objectives

The aim of this study is to investigate the current state of knowledge about factors contributing to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and interventions to positively stimulate these factors. The effectiveness of the flipped classroom is conceptualized in this study as test scores, the achievement of higher learning goals, and student perceptions (e.g. motivation, satisfaction, engagement). The main question that will be focused on is: Which factors affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and how could these factors be positively stimulated? To answer this question the following sub questions will be answered: 1) Which factors affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom positively or negatively? 2) Which factors intermediate the effectiveness of the flipped classroom? 3) How could the affecting and intermediating factors be stimulated in a positive way?

Intermediating factors are defined in this study as factors that mediate the effect of the positive and negative factors on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom. An example of an intermediating factor is the inclusion of seductive details. The effect of level of prior knowledge on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is mediated by the inclusion of seductive details, because the flipped classroom is more effective for students with a high level of prior knowledge when seductive details are included. Affecting factors are conceptualized in this study as positive and/or negative factors that affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a positive and/or a negative way.

Search strategies

This study is a state-of-the-art-review which is defined by [ 33 ] as follow: “ A state-of-the-art review tends to address more current matters in contrast to other combined retrospective and current approaches. This kind of review may offer new perspectives on issue or point out area for future research” ([ 33 ], p. 94). At the beginning of April 2020, the databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were consulted. These databases are well-known in the educational and biomedical sciences and comprise a broad selection of articles. The aim was to retrieve all the studies that are conducted on the instructional method flipped classroom in the health science education domain and contribute to answering the research questions, except the studies that are conducted on team-based learning. This decision was made, because team-based learning is a specific and unique form of flipped classroom. Team-based learning relies more heavily on small group teaching than other instructional methods [ 60 ]. Team-based learning is furthermore characterized by a sequence of steps: 1) advance assignment, 2) individual readiness assurance test, 3) team readiness assurance test, 4) instructor clarification review, 5) team application, 6) appeal. Another crucial element of team-based learning is peer evaluation [ 67 ]. Especially the fact that summative assessment is a part of a team-based learning sequence, makes this educational strategy different from other flipped classroom designs. Because of the uniqueness and specific features, team-based learning is hard to compare with other forms of flipped classroom. Team-based learning has its own line of research that is especially focused on this form of flipped classroom [ 70 ].

By consulting the databases, the following search terms were used in titles and abstracts: (flipped classroom) AND (higher education) NOT (team-based learning), (inverted classroom) AND (higher education) NOT (team-based learning), and (flipped learning) AND (higher education) NOT (team-based learning). The time was limited by the last five years (2016 till 2020), because studies within this time frame provide the most current insights.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Table 1 shows the inclusion and exclusion criteria that are used in this study to include or exclude the articles.

Figure 1 shows the inclusion-and exclusion procedure

Inclusion-and exclusion procedure

Of all records 69.8% ( k = 1276) was screened by a second researcher (MJO and GS). The percentage of agreement on inclusion/exclusion of studies based on titles and abstracts was 95.49. This was considered satisfactory. Differences were discussed upon consensus was reached.

Data appraisal

The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the checklist for quasi-experimental studies and the checklist for qualitative studies by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI, 2020). The quality of 10 randomly chosen articles was assessed by two researchers independently (JO and KT). The total percentage of agreement was 71.38%. The differences were discussed upon consensus was reached.

Data extraction

To assess the main features of the studies, the included studies were systematically analyzed by making use of a coding scheme. The coding scheme is displayed in Additional file 1 . Using this coding scheme, amongst other features of the studies sample characteristics, educational context features, methodological features, and general study information were assessed for each study. Two researchers independently coded a set of 10 randomly chosen articles (JO and KT). The percentage of agreement was 78.85 on features of the study and differences were discussed upon consensus was reached. This percentage was considered satisfactory.

Data analysis

Since the outcome variables, research designs, and research methods differ a lot between the studies, we have decided to narratively summarize the data, rather than conducting a quantitative meta-analysis. The qualitative analysis of the data was conducted according to the grounded theory method described by Boeije (2010). We choose this method, because it enables a more detailed analysis and is applicable for the construction of a new theory. The analysis consisted of two steps: segmenting and reassembling. Segmenting consisted of open and axial coding. Open coding is the fragmentation of text and the labeling of the fragments with codes and axial coding is the establishments of relations between codes, the clustering of codes, and the defining of codes. In the last step of the analysis, reassembling, the core category is determined to which all the other categories can be related. The software package MaxQDA 2020 (VERBI Software, 2019) was used for coding the studies. During the analysis memos were written to write up ideas that arise during coding. The emerging themes were discussed in the research group.

Search results

In total 3505 studies were retrieved. Of these retrieved studies duplicates were deleted by the first author ( k = 1691). During the first screening of titles and abstracts, studies in which flipped classroom was not the main didactic principle ( k = 628), for example studies on MOOCs, were excluded from this review. Studies in which higher education was not the population ( k = 136), for example studies conducted in primary education, were also excluded. Furthermore, contributions to conferences, validation studies and dissertations ( k = 333) and Non-English articles ( k = 24) were not included in this study. After the first screening, the accessibility of the full-text of the articles was checked and results were excluded if the full-text could not be obtained ( k = 69). During the second screening, the full text of the remaining 366 records were assessed for eligibility based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria mentioned in Table 1 . After the second screening, 278 results were excluded because they did not meet all of the inclusion criteria from Table 1 . Figure 2 shows the records of the literature search and the selection procedure of the articles.

PRISMA Flow Diagram of Literature Search and Processing of Records. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Study characteristics

Additional file 1 shows the characteristics of the included studies such as research design, research method, research quality, and topic per study.

Study quality assessment

The quality of the studies was overall sufficient, the quality of 11 of the 88 studies was insufficient. The studies with insufficient quality were also included in this study. Additional file 1 shows the study quality assessment.

Effectiveness of the flipped classroom

The effectiveness of the flipped classroom is in the included studies often expressed as test scores. Several studies have shown an increase in students’ short-term scores on a summative test in a flipped classroom compared to a traditional classroom [ 1 , 4 , 14 , 18 , 19 , 30 , 31 , 35 , 47 , 50 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 73 , 78 , 85 , 87 , 95 , 99 ]. However, Chien and Hsieh [ 19 ] and Chutinan et al. [ 21 ] showed that the long-term effects of the flipped classroom were insignificant, when students returned to a traditional classroom setting. This means that the flipped classroom does not have a long-term effect. Mennella [ 59 ] concluded that the flipped classroom does not have benefits regarding test scores over other active-learning components.

Other ways to express the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is student perceptions, amongst other perceptions satisfaction, motivation, and engagement. Several studies have shown an increase in student perceptions [ 18 , 55 , 61 ].

The qualitative analysis of the included studies according to the grounded theory method revealed six main factors that play a role in the effectiveness of the flipped classroom; 1) student characteristics, 2) implementation, 3) task characteristics, 4) out-of-class activities, 5) in-class activities, 6) teacher characteristics. The factor student characteristics consists of the sub-factors 1a) self-regulated learning skills, 1b) prior knowledge, and 1c) learning attitude. Self-regulated learning is the planning, monitoring, and evaluation of learning [ 100 ]. Teacher characteristics is conceptualized in this study as the skills, knowledge, attitude, and traits of a teacher.

Positive and negative factors contributing to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom

The first research question addressed the factors which contribute positively or negatively to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom. The analysis showed several factors that affect the flipped classroom negatively or positively. Table 2 shows the factors that affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom positively or negatively, organized by the aforementioned main factors. The main factor teacher characteristics affects the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in an indirect way as a mediator. How teacher characteristics affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom will therefore be further described in the next section.

Self-regulated learning skills

Several studies show factors of self-regulated learning skills that affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a positive or a negative way (Table 2 , section 1a). The flipped classroom prevents procrastination by completing the study material of the pre-study before the in-class activities. This results in more time for deeper learning during in-class activities. Other positive aspects relate to the student-centeredness of the learning approach. The student is responsible for his own learning and can learn at his own pace. The student can plan the pre-class activities in his own time, can compete these activities at his own pace and has the ability to look again trough the learning material. In case of a video, students can pause and review the video. The student-centeredness enables the student to develop his self-directed learning readiness. A flipped classroom makes it possible to give students timely feedback by formative testing of the self-study and providing feedback during in-class activities. This enables the student to reflect on his own learning, this is a prerequisite for self-directed learning. However, because of the student-centeredness more self-regulation is required of the learner and the flipped classroom approach may lead to non-attendance or non-preparation. This could be caused by the assumption that the completion of either the out-of-class activities only or either the in-class activities only, is sufficient to pass the course or by the high workload.

Prior knowledge

Little research has been conducted on prior knowledge in relation to the flipped classroom. One study shows that prior knowledge affects the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a negative way (Table 2 , section 1b), because the flipped classroom requires more prior knowledge. The student has to acquire and understand the knowledge on his own before the in-class activities during the out-of-class activities.

Learning attitude

Several studies show that aspects of students’ learning attitude affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in both, a negative and a positive way (Table 2 , section 1c). The student’s concentration, engagement, motivation, confidence, and satisfaction are enhanced in a flipped classroom. In the flipped classroom learning takes place in an active way, during in-class activities students actively apply the knowledge acquired during the out-of-class activities by means of for example, problem-solving activities and discussions. These types of activities increase student engagement and leads to the maintenance of a high concentration during in-class activities. Chien and Hsieh [ 19 ] found that the motivational constructs intrinsic value, self-efficacy, and self-regulation significantly increase in the flipped classroom compared to the traditional classroom. This significant difference is caused by self-paced learning, self-understanding, and self-initiated learning. However, the motivational construct cognitive strategy use does not significantly increase compared to the traditional classroom. However, more motivation is required in the flipped classroom to engage in discussion and complete the out-of-class activities. Furthermore, some students don’t prefer the flipped classroom over the traditional classroom. Probably because of the effort and engagement that is required by active learning.

Implementation

Several studies showed that factors of the implementation affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a negative way (Table 2 , section 3 ). Time and resources should be invested by the teacher, student, and the institute to implement the flipped classroom. Out-of-class learning content that ensures the acquiring of knowledge before class, and in-class learning activities such as cases and assignments should be created. In a lot of the flipped classrooms technology is used. Another investment that should be made to implement the flipped classroom is therefore the investment in technology.

Task characteristics

Several studies showed factors of task characteristics that affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a positive or a negative way (3). The flipped classroom facilitates the development of higher cognitive skills by providing guidance during in-class activities in which the higher cognitive skills are acquired. Higher cognitive skills are the three highest levels of Bloom’s taxonomy and consider the application, analysis, and synthesis of knowledge. The flipped classroom is in many cases a competence-oriented approach. Acquiring new competencies require more integrative tasks. Furthermore, problem-solving skills are enhanced in a flipped classroom. For instance, a survey conducted by Cheng et al. [ 18 ] shows that 80% of the participants experience an increase in their problem solving ability as a result of the flipped classroom. However, the flipped classroom is not suitable for learning material that is too difficult for the learner to understand by himself, because the learner must be able to achieve the lower-order learning goals by himself during the out-of-class activities.

Out-of-class activities

Several studies have been conducted on out-class-activities in relation to flipped classroom (Table 2 , section 40 ). Positive factors are that students can look again through the learning material and the flipped classroom provides a lot of learning opportunities by enabling interaction and active learning. However, a negative factor is that students experience a lack of adaptive assessment in the flipped classroom, for example a lack of feedback.

In-class activities

The last factor that appeared by several studies to affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is in-class activities (5). A positive factor is the use of active learning methods in the flipped classroom, which provides a lot of learning opportunities in class. Another positive factor is the increase of interaction between students and between the teacher and the student. However, a negative factor is that students desire more passive explanation. Probably because students are sometimes not able to acquire the lower-order skills on their own during the out-of-class activities, when the constructs are new or difficult to understand.

Teacher characteristics

The factor teacher characteristics affects the effectiveness of the flipped classroom not directly and acts only as an intermediating factor. This factor is further described in the next section.

Intermediating factors contributing to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom

The second research question addressed the factors that intermediate the effect of the main factors on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom. The main factors student characteristics, task characteristics, and out-of-class activities affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom not only directly, but also indirectly. The main factor teacher characteristics affects the effectiveness of the flipped classroom as a mediator. The main factors in-class activities and implementation affect the flipped classroom only directly and are therefore not described in this section. Table 3 shows these intermediating factors of the effectiveness of the flipped classroom per main factor.

The effect of self-regulated learning skills on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is affected by several factors (Table 3 , section 1a). Students need to adapt their learning approach and study habits. The flipped classroom requires an active learning approach in which the students complete the out-of-class activities on their own and engage in active learning during in-class activities. Shibukawa and Taguchi [ 74 ] showed that students obtain significantly higher grades when they continuously review the learning objectives. In order to be effective, it is important that students have a certain level of self-regulated learning skills. Self-regulation is required for the completion of out-of-class activities. Without the completion of out-of-class activities students learn less during in-class activities.

Furthermore, a factor that has been found to intermediate the effects of prior knowledge on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom, is the inclusion of seductive details (Table 3 , section 1b). Maloy et al. [ 53 ] showed that students with a lot of prior knowledge report to learn more when seductive details are included. Seductive details are information that is interesting but not related to the learning objective. However, there is no difference in scores between the participants who receive seductive details and the participants who don’t receive seductive details.

The effect of learning attitude on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is intermediated by several factors (Table 3 , section 1c). Motivation is enhanced when videos are used and/or study sessions are spaced. Spacing is about distributing learning events in time rather than immediate succession of the learning events. Students are more satisfied when they have more shorter sessions per week than when they have less longer sessions per week. It is not yet clear what is the cause for the difference in satisfaction. In order to obtain a positive learning attitude, it is important that students accept the flipped classroom as a learning approach. This requires adaptation to the flipped classroom. Furthermore, a student’s group work preference and level of engagement affects a student’s learning attitude in the flipped classroom. This is because of the active learning methods that are used, such as group assignments.

Several intermediating factors are found that are related to task characteristics (Table 3 , section 9 ). A little-and-often assessment approach enhances the engagement and achievement of the learner, because of the engagement of the learner with his learning process. The flipped classroom is more effective for higher order tasks. It is more effective for tasks such as problem-solving than for tasks such as memorizing factual knowledge. A non-didactic approach makes the flipped classroom more effective. A non-didactic approach is considered as a learning approach in which students have to reflect on the learning material in order to draw their own conclusions and consider the relevance of the different perspectives that are taken. Furthermore, in-and out-of-class problem-solving and the completion of preliminary work before class enhances the effectiveness of the flipped classroom.

The effect of out-of-class activities on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is also mediated by several intermediating factors (Table 3 , section 40 ). It is important to upload the materials on time to make sure that the students have sufficient time to complete the out-of-class assignments. During the out-of-class activities, guidance should be provided. It is not yet known how this guidance ideally looks like. Videos are more effective than reading materials.

Other intermediating factors that have been found relate to teacher characteristics (Table 3 , section 6). Teachers must accept the concept of flipped classroom. The role of the teacher changes from lecturer to coach, facilitator, and mentor who supports the student’s learning process. Furthermore, the motivation of the teacher for teaching is important.

Interventions stimulating the affecting factors

The third research question addressed the interventions that can be used to stimulate the effecting factors in a positive way. The main factors affecting the effectiveness of the flipped classroom directly and/or indirectly as a mediating factor could be stimulated by several interventions. Table 4 shows these interventions, categorized by the main factors.

Several interventions can be done to stimulate the self-regulated learning skills (Table 4 , section 1a). First of all, it is important to encourage class attendance and participation and to provide students possibilities to support the development of self-regulated learning skills. The development of self-regulated learning skills could be supported by providing prompts or feedback. Examples of prompts are to ask the students to relate the new knowledge to prior knowledge or to make the concepts visual. Feedback can help students to adjust their learning. A detailed rubric and formative assessment can also help to show students their progress and how they can develop. To show that formative assessment is valued, a small proportion of the course grade can be given to the formative assessment. The student can be provided structure by organizing the learning process into stages and providing students a guideline. A student’s working load can be higher in a flipped classroom compared to a traditional classroom. In order to manage the working load, home-work can be made optional. Furthermore, it is important to be adaptive as a teacher and to provide just-in-time interventions to make learning optimal and meet the needs of the individual learner.

The learning attitude can also be positively stimulated by several interventions (Table 4 , section 1c). It is important to create a performance-approach environment. Learners who have a performance-approach strive to be the best or be seen as talented. The performance-approach is significantly related to achievement and self-regulated learning. By creating a high competitiveness context, the performance-approach is stimulated. Videos can be made more engaging by creating an interactive authentic environment. This can be done by making a video in which the teacher interacts with the student. This enhances a student’s engagement. Consider the preview of learning materials, interaction with peers, teacher facilitation, and classroom participation in the design of the flipped classroom. Preview of learning materials, teaching facilitation, and classroom participation positively predict enjoyment. Cho et al. (2021) conclude: “students experienced enjoyment if they (a) perceived the preview materials as meaningful and helpful, (b) believed the instructors facilitated their learning, and (c) actively participated in learning activities” (p. 9). Furthermore, it is important to make the curriculum as relevant as possible for students.

Several interventions can be done to stimulate the implementation (Table 4 , section 3 ). To spare time and resources, existing materials can be used. Blair et al. [ 8 ] recommend paying as much attention to student grades as to student perception during the implementation of the flipped classroom. They state that it is important to realize that the flipped classroom requires different teaching and learning approaches in order to prevent decrease of grades because of the requirement of self-regulation and change of learning approach. The teachers’ and students’ expectations should be addressed at the beginning of the implementation. To get used to the flipped classroom it is important to integrate active learning methodologies into a large number of subjects. Use the flipped classroom at least three weeks and implement it gradually to facilitate the adjustment of the learner to the flipped classroom.

In regard to task characteristics, little research has been conducted on interventions to address this (Table 4 , section 9 ). Although, F. H. Wang [ 90 ] mentioned that it is important to include in-and out-of-class problem solving tasks in a flipped classroom to develop the problem solving ability.

Several interventions have been found that stimulate out-of-class activities (Table 4 , section 40 ). Instruct students to work together with peers during the out-of-class activities and provide the student with a good structure by structuring the goals, learning method, and assessment. Make use of out-of-class activities that fit the students well by making use of learning methods such as e-learning, quizzes, learning management systems, gamification, and mobile-based learning. Students can also produce their own materials by making use of online tools. The online materials should always be available. Take care adding text information on the videos because of the cognitive load. The knowledge acquired during the out-of-class activities can be assessed by making use of authentic assessment.

The studies also show several interventions related to in-class activities (Table 4 , section 5). Group management can be used to make the in-class activities more effective. With group management the group is divided into small groups, each group containing one student with a high Grade Point Average, who can help their group members when needed. Just like the out-of-class activities it is important to provide structure during in-class activities by structuring the goals, teaching method, and assessment. A partially flipped classroom can be used to make sure that the students adapt more easily to the flipped classroom. To increase the student satisfaction, it is important to space the sessions and to make sure that all students understand the constructs discussed in the out-of-class activities the key constructs could be reviewed at the beginning of the in-class activities. Furthermore, it is important to create opportunities for dialogue.

Furthermore, in regard to teacher characteristics, little research has been conducted on interventions to address this (Table 4 , section 6). Hyypiä et al. [ 40 ] mention that it is important to pay attention to relevant dimensions of the flipped classroom in teacher training. Relevant dimensions of the concept of flipped classroom are pedagogical practices, curriculum work, students’ guidance and counseling, technology, and assessment [ 40 ].

This state-of-the-art-review aimed to investigate the current state of knowledge about factors contributing to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and interventions to positively affect these factors. This review has qualitatively analyzed the studies that are conducted on the instructional method flipped classroom in the health science education domain from 2016 till 2020. This study aimed to answer the following question: Which factors affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and how could these factors be positively stimulated? In order to answer this question the following sub questions will be answered: 1) What are positive and negative factors of the flipped classroom? 2) Which factors mediate the effectiveness of the flipped classroom? 3) How could the factors be stimulated in a positive way?

Primary findings

This study showed that six main factors play a role in the effectiveness of the flipped classroom: student characteristics, teacher characteristics, implementation, task characteristics, out-of-class activities and in-class activities. The factor student characteristics consists of the sub-factors self-regulated learning skills, prior knowledge, and learning attitude. The factors student characteristics, implementation, task characteristics, out-of-class activities, and in-class activities affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a positive and/or a negative way, shown in Table 2 . The effect of these factors on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is mediated by the factors student characteristics, teacher characteristics, task characteristics, and out-of-class activities, shown in Table 3 . The affecting and intermediating factors can be stimulated by several interventions, shown in Table 4 .

Findings related to earlier research

Our study showed that learning attitude can affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom negatively, because not all students prefer the flipped classroom. This is not consistent with a previous study conducted by Hew and Lo [ 37 ]. They showed that students prefer flipped classroom over traditional classroom. This could be caused by the design of the flipped classroom. Our study showed that learning attitude can be positively enhanced by making the curriculum relevant for the students.

In the literature there is no consistence about whether the flipped classroom enhances students’ study achievement. The meta-analysis conducted by Chen et al. [ 17 ] showed that student achievement is higher in a flipped classroom compared to a traditional classroom. However, the meta-analysis conducted by Gillette et al. [ 29 ] showed no significant difference in test scores between the flipped classroom and the traditional classroom. This could be due to a difference in design of the flipped classroom between the included studies of both meta-analyses. The studies did not use a standardized flipped classroom format and the design differed a lot between the studies. To enhance the effectiveness of the flipped classroom it is important to consider the factors that directly and indirectly affect the effectiveness of the flipped classroom during the design of the flipped classroom, as described in this study.

Our study showed that an intermediating factor of the effect of prior knowledge on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom is the inclusion of seductive details. Students with more prior knowledge learn more when seductive details are included, whereas students with fewer prior knowledge learn less when seductive details are included. This is in line with the cognitive load theory, as developed by Sweller [ 81 ]. The positive factors of the flipped classroom regarding self-regulated learning, the student can learn at his own pace, is responsible for his own learning, and develops self-directed learning readiness, is in line with the learning theory of constructivism. The intervention of creating an authentic environment is also in line with constructivism.

A meta-analysis conducted by van Alten et al. [ 88 ] showed several factors that are important for a flipped classroom in order to be effective compared to a traditional classroom. The flipped classroom should contain quizzes and the face-to-face class time should be the same as in the traditional classroom [ 88 ]. Our study also showed quizzes as one of the many interventions to enhance the effectiveness of the flipped classroom. To stimulate the factors affecting the flipped classroom in a positive and/or a negative way, the interventions mentioned in this study could be applied.

Strengths of the review

The research team consists of policy advisors and educational researchers. Therefore, different perspectives on education come together in this research. This makes the review multi perspective. The review had a broad scope, because all factors of the flipped classroom are taken into account in this review. This provides a great overview of the factors that are involved in the effectiveness of the flipped classroom.

Limitations of the review

This review also has limitations that should be addressed. For instance, factors affecting the effectiveness of the flipped classroom in a positive or a negative way were derived from the qualitative analysis. However, whether an effect is positive, negative is relative. This study considers the fact that not all students prefer the flipped classroom over a traditional classroom as a negative effect. Discussing this with colleagues, we came to the conclusion that this could also be seen as a given, that is neutral.

Another limitation of this study is that some findings could have more value than other findings because of the design and the quality of the included study. As described in the method section, 11 of the 88 included studies were assessed as insufficient. A lot of the studies compare the effectiveness of the flipped classroom to the traditional classroom. However, some studies did not include a control group. Some studies were randomized controlled trials, whereas other studies were quasi-experimental or qualitative studies. Furthermore, to some aspects of the flipped classroom (for example the aspect prior knowledge and task characteristics) less research is conducted than to other aspects of the flipped classroom (for example self-regulated learning or in-class activities). This could have implications for the value of the findings.

Recommendations for further research

To several aspects of the flipped classroom a lot of research has been conducted, for example on in-class activities and self-regulated learning. However, on the aspects prior knowledge, teacher characteristics, and task characteristics little research has been conducted. Therefore, future research should be conducted on these aspects. An effect study could be conducted to the different interventions described in this study. It is not known yet how much effect these interventions have on the effectiveness of the flipped classroom. Therefore, a pre-post control group intervention study should be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions. Another suggestion for future research could be the investigation of how the guidance during out-of-class activities ideally looks like. Research has shown that guidance during out-of-class activities should be provided in order to make the flipped classroom effective. For example, in the form of prompts and feedback, as described at page 16. However, it is not yet known how this guidance should be designed in order to be most effective. Furthermore, future research should be conducted to investigate whether the findings of this review can be generalized to other domains than health science education.

Conclusion and practical implications

We can conclude that by applying the interventions for an effective flipped classroom and taking the factors affecting the effectiveness into account in the design of the flipped classroom, student learning can be stimulated in the flipped classroom. This study provides interventions for teachers, educational designers, and boards of universities to effectively use the flipped classroom. By applying the flipped classroom and enhancing the effectiveness of the flipped classroom by applying these interventions, the student- centeredness, efficiency, and flexibility of health science education will be enhanced. This way students can more effectively and efficiently master the competencies that are needed to become a good health professional.

Availability of data and materials

Authors can confirm that all relevant data are included in the article and/or its additional files.

Abbreviations

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Angadi NB, Kavi A, Shetty K, Hashilkar NK. Effectiveness of flipped classroom as a teaching–learning method among undergraduate medical students–An interventional study. J Educ Health Promot. 2019;8. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_163_19 .

Bakla A. Learner-generated materials in a flipped pronunciation class: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Comput Educ. 2018;125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.017 .

Beatty BJ, Albert M. Student perceptions of a flipped classroom management course. J Appl Res Higher Educ. 2016;8. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2015-0069 .

Becker R, Proud S. Flipping quantitative tutorials. Int Rev Econ Educ. 2018;29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2018.01.004 .

Behmanesh F, Bakouei F, Nikpour M, Parvaneh M. Comparing the effects of traditional teaching and flipped classroom methods on midwifery students' practical learning: The embedded mixed method. Technol, Knowledge Learn: Learn Math, Sci Arts Context Digital Technol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09478-y .

Bingen HM, Steindal SA, Krumsvik RJ, Tveit B. Studying physiology within a flipped classroom: The importance of on-campus activities for nursing students' experiences of mastery. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15308 .

Birgili B, Seggie N, Kızıltepe Z. Investigating the relationship between volitional strategies and academic achievement in a flipped learning environment. Croatian J Educ: Hrvatski časopis za odgoj i obrazovanje. 2019;21. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v21i1.3006 .

Blair E, Maharaj C, Primus S. Performance and perception in the flipped classroom. Educ Inf Technol. 2016;21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9393-5 .

Boevé AJ, Meijer RR, Bosker RJ, Vugteveen J, Hoekstra R, Albers CJ. Implementing the flipped classroom: an exploration of study behaviour and student performance. High Educ. 2017;74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0104-y .

Bouwmeester RA, de Kleijn RA, van den Berg IE, ten Cate OTJ, van Rijen HV, Westerveld HE. Flipping the medical classroom: Effect on workload, interactivity, motivation and retention of knowledge. Comput Educ. 2019;139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.002 .

Burkhart S, Craven D. Digital workbooks in flipped nutrition education: Student perspectives'. Educ Sci. 2020;10. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10010022 .

Calimeris L. Effects of flipping the principles of microeconomics class: Does scheduling matter? Int Rev Econ Educ. 2018;29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2018.01.002 .

Casselman MD, Atit K, Henbest G, Guregyan C, Mortezaei K, Eichler JF. Dissecting the flipped classroom: Using a randomized controlled trial experiment to determine when student learning occurs. J Chem Educ. 2019;97. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00767 .

Castedo R, López LM, Chiquito M, Navarro J, Cabrera JD, Ortega MF. Flipped classroom—comparative case study in engineering higher education. Comput Appl Eng Educ. 2019;27. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22069 .

Chan S-Y, Lam YK, Ng TF. Student’s perception on initial experience of flipped classroom in pharmacy education: Are we ready? Innov Educ Teach Int. 2020;57. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1541189 .

Chang C-Y, Kao C-H, Hwang G-J. Facilitating students' critical thinking and decision making performances: A flipped classroom for neonatal health care training. J Educ Technol Soc. 2020;23. https://doi.org/10.2307/26921132 .

Chen KS, Monrouxe L, Lu YH, Jenq CC, Chang YJ, Chang YC, et al. Academic outcomes of flipped classroom learning: a meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2018;52. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13616 .

Cheng, X., Ka Ho Lee, K., Chang, E. Y., & Yang, X. (2017). The “flipped classroom” approach: Stimulating positive learning attitudes and improving mastery of histology among medical students. Anat Sci Educ, 10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1664

Chien C-F, Hsieh L-HC. Exploring university students' achievement, motivation, and receptivity of flipped learning in an engineering mathematics course. Int J Online Pedagogy Course Design (IJOPCD). 2018;8. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.2018100102 .

Cho M-H, Park SW, Lee S-E. Student characteristics and learning and teaching factors predicting affective and motivational outcomes in flipped college classrooms. Stud High Educ. 2021;46. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1643303 .

Chutinan S, Riedy CA, Park SE. Student performance in a flipped classroom dental anatomy course. Eur J Dent Educ. 2018;22. https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.12300 .

Comber DP, Brady-Van den Bos M. Too much, too soon? A critical investigation into factors that make Flipped Classrooms effective. High Educ Res Dev. 2018;37. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1455642 .

Dehghanzadeh S, Jafaraghaee F. Comparing the effects of traditional lecture and flipped classroom on nursing students' critical thinking disposition: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.027 .

Dooley L, Makasis N. Understanding student behavior in a flipped classroom: Interpreting learning analytics data in the veterinary pre-clinical sciences. Educ Sci. 2020;10. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100260 .

Dooley LM, Frankland S, Boller E, Tudor E. Implementing the Flipped Classroom in a Veterinary Pre-clinical Science Course: Student Engagement, Performance, and Satisfaction. J Vet Med Educ. 2018;45. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.1116-173r .

Evaristo-Chiyong T, Mattos-Vela M. Flipped learning for teaching biostatistics to peruvian dental students. J Oral Res. 2019;8. https://doi.org/10.17126/jor.v8i2.787 .

Fox WH, Docherty PD. Student perspectives of independent and collaborative learning in a flipped foundational engineering course. Australas J Educ Technol. 2019;35. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3804 .

Garrison DR, Kanuka H. Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet High Educ. 2004;7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001 .

Gillette C, Rudolph M, Kimble C, Rockich-Winston N, Smith L, Broedel-Zaugg K. A meta-analysis of outcomes comparing flipped classroom and lecture. Am J Pharm Educ. 2018;82. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe6898 .

Goh CF, Ong ET. Flipped classroom as an effective approach in enhancing student learning of a pharmacy course with a historically low student pass rate. Curr Pharm Teaching Learning. 2019;11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.025 .

González-Gómez D, Jeong JS, Rodríguez DA. Performance and perception in the flipped learning model: an initial approach to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching methodology in a general science classroom. J Sci Educ Technol. 2016;25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9605-9 .

Gopalan C. Effect of flipped teaching on student performance and perceptions in an Introductory Physiology course. Adv Physiol Educ. 2019;43. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00051.2018 .

Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x .

Hao Y. Exploring undergraduates' perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.032 .

He W, Holton AJ, Farkas G. Impact of partially flipped instruction on immediate and subsequent course performance in a large undergraduate chemistry course. Comput Educ. 2018;125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.020 .

Heo HJ, Chun BA. A study on the effects of mobile-based LMS on flipped learning: Focused on the affective pathway in pre-service teacher education. Int J Software Eng Appl. 2016;10. https://doi.org/10.14257/ijsela.2016.10.12.39 .

Hew KF, Lo CK. Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: a meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z .

Huang B, Hew KF, Lo CK. Investigating the effects of gamification-enhanced flipped learning on undergraduate students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement. Interact Learn Environ. 2019;27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653 .

Hwang G-J, Chang C-Y. Facilitating decision-making performances in nursing treatments: A contextual digital game-based flipped learning approach. Interact Learn Environ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1765391 .

Hyypiä M, Sointu E, Hirsto L, Valtonen T. Key Components of Learning Environments in Creating a Positive Flipped Classroom Course Experience. Intern J Learn, Teaching Educ Res. 2019;18. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.13.4 .

Jensen JL, Holt EA, Sowards JB, Ogden TH, West RE. Investigating strategies for pre-class content learning in a flipped classroom. J Sci Educ Technol. 2018;27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9740-6 .

Jitjumnong K, Suksakulchai S. Comparison Study of Student’s Learning Achievement between the Flip Classroom with and without Group Management. Int J Inform Educ Technol. 2019;9.

Karaoğlan Yılmaz FG, Öztürk T, Yılmaz R. The effect of structure in flipped classroom designs for deep and surface learning approaches. The Turkish Journal of. Educ Technol. 2017.

Kim YM, Yoon YS, Hong HC, Min A. Effects of a patient safety course using a flipped classroom approach among undergraduate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educ Today. 2019;79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2019.05.033 .

Kong F, Li Z, Su X, Zhuang W. Assessment of a flipped classroom model based on microlectures in a medical molecular biology course. J Biol Educ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2020.1808513 .

Kühl SJ, Schneider A, Kestler HA, Toberer M, Kühl M, Fischer MR. Investigating the self-study phase of an inverted biochemistry classroom–collaborative dyadic learning makes the difference. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1497-y .

Kühl SJ, Toberer M, Keis O, Tolks D, Fischer MR, Kühl M. Concept and benefits of the Inverted Classroom method for a competency-based biochemistry course in the pre-clinical stage of a human medicine course of studies. GMS J Med Educ. 2017;34. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001108 .

Kurban CF. Designing effective, contemporary assessment on a flipped educational sciences course. Interact Learn Environ. 2019;27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1522650 .

Lee J, Choi H. Rethinking the flipped learning pre-class: Its influence on the success of flipped learning and related factors. Br J Educ Technol. 2019;50. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12618 .

Lin Y-T. Impacts of a flipped classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students' learning performance, perception, and problem solving ability in a software engineering course. Comput Hum Behav. 2019;95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.036 .

Long T, Logan J, Waugh M. Students’ perceptions of the value of using videos as a pre-class learning experience in the flipped classroom. TechTrends. 2016;60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0045-4 .

Luo H, Yang T, Xue J, Zuo M. Impact of student agency on learning performance and learning experience in a flipped classroom. Br J Educ Technol. 2019;50. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12604 .

Maloy J, Fries L, Laski F, Ramirez G. Seductive details in the flipped classroom: The impact of interesting but educationally irrelevant information on student learning and motivation. CBE—Life Sci Educ. 2019;18. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-01-0004 .

McCarthy J. Reflections on a flipped classroom in first year higher education. Educ Res. 2016;26.

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. Acad Med, 89. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000086

McLean S, Attardi SM. Sage or guide? Student perceptions of the role of the instructor in a flipped classroom. Act Learn High Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787418793725 .

McNally, B., Chipperfield, J., Dorsett, P., Del Fabbro, L., Frommolt, V., Goetz, S., . . . Rung, A. (2017). Flipped classroom experiences: student preferences and flip strategy in a higher education context. High Educ, 73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0014-z

Mehta NB, Hull AL, Young JB, Stoller JK. Just imagine: new paradigms for medical education. Acad Med. 2013;88. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36a07 .

Mennella TA. Comparing the Efficacy of Flipped vs. Alternative Active Learning in a College Genetics Course. Am Biol Teach. 2016;78. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2016.78.6.471 .

Michaelsen LK, Sweet M. The essential elements of team-based learning. New Dir Teach Learn. 2008;2008. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.330 .

Mooring SR, Mitchell CE, Burrows NL. Evaluation of a flipped, large-enrollment organic chemistry course on student attitude and achievement. J Chem Educ. 2016;93. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00367 .

Morton DA, Colbert-Getz JM. Measuring the impact of the flipped anatomy classroom: The importance of categorizing an assessment by Bloom's taxonomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2017;10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1635 .

Murillo-Zamorano LR, Sánchez JÁL, Godoy-Caballero AL. How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: Effects on students' satisfaction. Comput Educ. 2019;141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103608 .

Murphy J, Chang J-M, Suaray K. Student performance and attitudes in a collaborative and flipped linear algebra course. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2016;47. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1102979 .

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

Park KH, Park KH, Chae SJ. Experiences of medical teachers in flipped learning for medical students: A phenomenological study. Korean J Med Educ. 2018;30. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2018.84 .

Parmelee, D., Michaelsen, L. K., Cook, S., & Hudes, P. D. (2012). Team-based learning: a practical guide: AMEE guide no. 65. Med Teach, 34. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.651179

Patanwala AE, Erstad BL, Murphy JE. Student use of flipped classroom videos in a therapeutics course. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2017;9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2016.08.043 .

Rathner JA, Schier MA. The impact of flipped classroom andragogy on student assessment performance and perception of learning experience in two advanced physiology subjects. Adv Physiol Educ. 2020;44. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00125.2019 .

Reimschisel T, Herring AL, Huang J, Minor TJ. A systematic review of the published literature on team-based learning in health professions education. Med Teach. 2017;39. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1340636 .

Røe Y, Ødegaard NB, Dahl-Michelsen T. Flipping the classroom in physiotherapy education: experiences, opportunities and challenges. Nordic J Digital Literacy. 2018;13. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-04-03 .

Şengel E. To FLIP or not to FLIP: Comparative case study in higher education in Turkey. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.034 .

Sezer B, Abay E. Looking at the impact of the flipped classroom model in medical education. Scand J Educ Res. 2019;63. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1452292 .

Shibukawa S, Taguchi M. Exploring the difficulty on students’ preparation and the effective instruction in the flipped classroom. J Comput High Educ. 2019;31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09220-3 .

Simmons, M., Colville, D., Bullock, S., Willems, J., Machado, M., McArdle, A., . . . Reser, D. (2020). Introducing the flip: A mixed method approach to gauge student and staff perceptions on the introduction of flipped pedagogy in pre-clinical medical education. Australas J Educ Technol, 36. https://doi.org/10.14742/AJET.5600

Singh K, Mahajan R, Gupta P, Singh T. Flipped classroom: A concept for engaging medical students in learning. Indian Pediatr. 2018;55.

Steen-Utheim AT, Foldnes N. A qualitative investigation of student engagement in a flipped classroom. Teach High Educ. 2018;23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1379481 .

Sudarmika P, Santyasa IW, Divayana DGH. Comparison between group discussion flipped classroom and lecture on student achievement and student characters. Int J Instr. 2020;13. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13312a .

Sukut SL, Mayer MN, D’Eon MF, Burbridge BE, Waldner CL. Comparing two resources used to teach pulmonary patterns for a flipped veterinary radiology course. Journal of veterinary medical education. 2021;48. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.2019-0049 .

Sun Z, Xie K. How do students prepare in the pre-class setting of a flipped undergraduate math course? A latent profile analysis of learning behavior and the impact of achievement goals. Internet High Educ. 2020;46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2020.100731 .

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55): Elsevier.

Tangiisuran B, Tye SC, Tan KW. Implementation and assessment of flipped classroom learning on medication distribution system to pharmacy undergraduates. Pharm Educ. 2017;17.

Telford M, Senior E. Healthcare students' experiences when integrating e-learning and flipped classroom instructional approaches. Br J Nurs. 2017;26. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2017.26.11.617 .

Tomas L, Doyle T, Skamp K. Are first year students ready for a flipped classroom? A case for a flipped learning continuum. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2019;16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0135-4 .

Turan Z, Goktas Y. The Flipped Classroom: instructional efficency and impact of achievement and cognitive load levels. J e-learning Knowledge Soc. 2016;12.

Uther P, Van Munster KA, Briggs N, O'Neill S, Kennedy S. Introducing early-phase medical students to clinical paediatrics using simulation and a flipped-classroom. J Paediatr Child Health. 2019;55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14366 .

Valdehita RE, Plata RB, Merodio JAM. Educational technology in flipped course design. Intern J Eng Educ. 2017;33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.02.025 .

van Alten DCD, Phielix C, Janssen J, Kester L. Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev. 2019;28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003 .

van der Vleuten CP, Driessen EW. What would happen to education if we take education evidence seriously? Perspectives Med Educ. 2014;3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-014-0129-9 .

Wang FH. On the relationships between behaviors and achievement in technology-mediated flipped classrooms: A two-phase online behavioral PLS-SEM model. Comput Educ. 2019;142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103653 .

Wang R, Liu CY. The relation of dental students' learning styles to their satisfaction with traditional and inverted classroom models. Bmc Med Education. 2019;19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1749-x .

Wang X, Dong L, Lyu W, Geng Z. Teaching health assessment symptomatology using a flipped classroom combined with scenario simulation. J Nurs Educ. 2020;59. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20200723-05 .

Webb R, Watson D, Shepherd C, Cook S. Flipping the classroom: is it the type of flipping that adds value? Stud High Educ. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1698535 .

White PJ, Naidu S, Yuriev E, Short JL, McLaughlin JE, Larson IC. Student engagement with a flipped classroom teaching design affects pharmacology examination performance in a manner dependent on question type. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe5931 .

Yang C, Yang X, Yang H, Fan Y. Flipped classroom combined with human anatomy web-based learning system shows promising effects in anatomy education. Medicine. 2020;99. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023096 .

Yilmaz RM, Baydas O. An examination of undergraduates’ metacognitive strategies in pre-class asynchronous activity in a flipped classroom. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2017;65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9534-1 .

Zainuddin Z, Habiburrahim H, Muluk S, Keumala CM. How do students become self-directed learners in the EFL flipped-class pedagogy? A study in higher education. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2019;8. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15270 .

Zheng B, Ward A, Stanulis R. Self-regulated learning in a competency-based and flipped learning environment: learning strategies across achievement levels and years. Medical Education Online. 2020;25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1686949 .

Zhu L, Lian ZM, Engstrom M. Use of a flipped classroom in ophthalmology courses for nursing, dental and medical students: A quasi-experimental study using a mixed-methods approach. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104262 .

Zimmerman BJ. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Pract. 2002;41. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102-2 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The assistance provided by Lente Blok was greatly appreciated. She helped us processing the characteristics of the included studies in Table 1 .

No external grants, funded by the Amsterdam UMC-location AMC.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Amsterdam UMC, AMC-University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Janique Oudbier, Gerard Spaai, Karline Timmermans & Tobias Boerboom

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors defined the research theme and designed the study. GS, KT, and MJO were responsible for the acquisition of data and the analysis of the data. All authors drafted the manuscript, helped to revise the manuscript critically, and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

Janique Oudbier is a PhD student in medical educational sciences.

Gerard Spaai is medical educational advisor and researcher.

Karline Timmermans is medical educational advisor and researcher.

Tobias Boerboom is medical educational researcher and head of the department of Center for Evidence Based Education at Amsterdam UMC location AMC.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janique Oudbier .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1. .

Study characteristics and quality.

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 licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence 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 licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Oudbier, J., Spaai, G., Timmermans, K. et al. Enhancing the effectiveness of flipped classroom in health science education: a state-of-the-art review. BMC Med Educ 22 , 34 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03052-5

Download citation

Received : 26 July 2021

Accepted : 30 November 2021

Published : 12 January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03052-5

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

• Flipped classroom
• Effectiveness
• Disadvantages
• Interventions
• Health science education

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 01 January 2024

Flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method for teaching vocabulary

• Damar Isti Pratiwi 1 ,
• Sri Wuli Fitriati 1 ,
• Issy Yuliasri 1 &
• Budi Waluyo 2  

Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education volume  9 , Article number:  1 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1628 Accesses

1 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

While gamified technology integration in vocabulary instruction within a flipped classroom has yielded beneficial teaching outcomes, specific studies have raised concerns about potential adverse effects linked to this approach. As a result, conducting a comparative analysis between gamified technology and conventional paper-based methods within the flipped classroom framework has become essential. This analysis aims to foster the development of a targeted teaching approach that adeptly addresses the unique needs of students. This study employed a sequential explanatory research design to examine the effectiveness of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method in teaching vocabulary to students with different proficiency levels. Quantitative data was gathered from a pretest and a posttest, whilst qualitative data was collected through teachers’ guided reflection. Using Academic Word List (300 target words), control groups employed a paper-based, while experimental groups applied gamified technology ( Quizlet, Kahoot!, Quizizz, Socrative, and Google Form ), which lasted 10 weeks. The participants were 144 non-English major students who took a general English course in the 2nd semester of 2023. Quantitative data analysis ran in SPSS 25 using Paired Sample t-Test and One-way ANOVA . The qualitative data were analyzed using thematic progression. The results showed that gamified technology did not affect students’ learning outcomes, while the paper-based method resulted conversely. It revealed that the paper-based method is more effective than gamified technology for students in general, with low proficiency and high-proficiency level. Further, teachers’ beliefs admitted distinctive issues that gamified technology was more effective for high-proficiency learners, whereas paper-based was more effective for low-proficiency learners. The difference analysis of quantitative and qualitative data sheds light on discussing threats while implementing gamified technology and possible solutions.

Introduction

Recent analyses and empirical studies on the use of technological advances in a game-based method of vocabulary instruction have demonstrated benefits in terms of improving language learners' engagement. Learning with technology is claimed to increase students' competence and success (Cripps, 2020 ; Pratiwi & Waluyo, 2023 ; Wahyuni et al., 2020 ; Waluyo & Bucol, 2021 ). It also causes a change in language teaching methodology, moving it from student-centered to teacher-centered (Kariadi & Pratiwi, 2022 ; Teng, 2017 ). It also gives students of foreign languages a chance to learn independently outside of the classroom using a variety of applications, websites, videos, online classes, e-books, etc. (Landers, 2014 ; Talan & Gulsecen, 2019 ). Furthermore, because it enables teachers to act as facilitators in the classroom, digital technology used in gamification is seen as one of the most effective techniques for promoting independent learning (Anggoro & Pratiwi, 2023 ; Nurhidayat et al., 2021 ). Students in this situation can work together to improve their conceptual and verbal skills while also employing language as a tool for acquiring knowledge, connecting new concepts to their current source of information, and strengthening their linguistic and cognitive abilities (Plass et al., 2015 ; Ueno, 2019 ).

The majority of vocabulary game research, however, is still focused on use in the classroom (Waluyo & Bucol, 2021 ). Students must learn numerous terms to become competent in English, yet vocabulary instruction in class rarely covers them. EFL learners may not be effectively introduced to the language and its components due to their restricted usage of English in everyday conversations, resulting in poor vocabulary mastering and a small vocabulary. Thus, vocabulary acquisition must be addressed to avoid harming EFL learners (Lavoie, 2016 ; Miller, 1995 ). Examining the practical use of gamified vocabulary instruction through the flipped classroom procedure, which occurs both inside and outside the classroom, may be necessary to determine whether improving students' vocabulary achievement is possible.

Drawing on this brief review, it can be assumed that implementing gamification in teaching and learning has proved to benefit students in improving their vocabulary skills as well as encouraging learners’ enjoyment and autonomy. However, a report mentioned that the implementation of CALL and MALL in terms of a gamified learning method showed negative learners’ attitudes toward language learning (Wu, 2019 ). In the Indonesian context, digital technologies distracted students from their studies, made them more likely to plagiarize their papers, and made them more inclined to cheat on exams (Pratiwi & Waluyo, 2023 ; Wijayatiningsih et al., 2022 ). Therefore, the ability and inclination to behave independently and cooperatively cannot be a part of the language-learning process. Independent learning, which should enable learners to control their capacity to become autonomous learners of the target language, could not be achieved (Mahalli et al., 2020 ; Ueno, 2019 ). There is also evidence of non-significant differences in test scores between the gamified and traditional paper-based vocabulary teaching classes (Rachels & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2018 ). Hence, this study seeks to compare gamified technology and paper-based methods in teaching vocabulary to create a better classroom environment that students favor.

The novelty of this study lies in its dedicated pursuit of investigating and contrasting the effectiveness of a gamified technology-driven flipped classroom approach and a traditional paper-based method for teaching vocabulary to students with varying high and low proficiency levels. Addressing the crucial role of proficiency as a foundational factor in second language acquisition, Renandya et al. ( 2018 ) underscored the necessity for tailored instructional strategies catering to diverse learner proficiency levels. Existing research has often skewed toward interventions favoring high-proficiency students, inadvertently overlooking the core challenges faced by their lower-proficiency counterparts (Alqahtani, 2015 ; Alshammari, 2022 ; Panmei & Waluyo, 2022 ). By comparing vocabulary instruction through the innovative lens of gamified technology and the conventional paper-based mode across both proficiency tiers, the study anticipates substantiating empirical evidence of effective vocabulary enhancement for both high and low proficiency cohorts. The envisioned outcome of this endeavour is to equip educators with invaluable insights, empowering them to selectively adopt pedagogical approaches that optimally align with the distinctive learning profiles of their students, thereby elevating the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the learning journey towards the achievement of their educational objectives in vocabulary learning.

The present study, hence, addresses the following research questions:

How is the effectiveness of flipped classroom with gamified technology in teaching vocabulary for high- and low- proficiency students?

How is the effectiveness of flipped classroom with paper-based method in teaching vocabulary for high- and low- proficiency students?

How is the comparison of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method in teaching vocabulary for high- and low-proficiency students?

How do teachers perceive flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method in teaching vocabulary?

Literature review

Vocabulary teaching.

Vocabulary is the most important part of any language learning; hence vocabulary instruction is essential to English teaching. Ludwig ( 2018 ) defined vocabulary teaching as the way to know a word. Nation ( 2001 ) mentioned three different types of knowing a word, including (1) knowing the form of a word; (2) knowing the meaning of a word; (3) knowing the function of a word. According to Yue ( 2017 ), English vocabulary teaching has three requirements: teaching objective, teaching object, and teaching method. Mastering pronunciation, spelling, meaning, and vocabulary usage are objectives in English vocabulary teaching. The teaching object means the students' primary, secondary, or higher level. The most important factor in determining the need for teaching objects is determining how to effectively use new teaching materials and methods to attract students' attention in the process of vocabulary acquisition. Teaching method means the way to achieve teaching objectives into teaching objects. Some aspects of the teaching method are the way of teaching (online, offline, or hybrid), materials, and media.

There were some arguments regarding vocabulary training strategies. For instance, Miller ( 1995 ) suggested some examples of various teaching methods that can be used with pupils to help them become more vocable: (a) resourcing: utilizing reference works in the target language, such as dictionaries, encyclopedias, or textbooks; (b) repetition: mimicking a linguistic model, involving direct practicing and silence recitation; (c) grouping: putting terms, jargon, or ideas into categories based on their characteristics; (d) imagery: utilizing authentic or imagined visuals to comprehend or recall new knowledge; (e) auditory representation: rehearsing in one's head the sound of a single word, phrase, or lengthy linguistic pattern; (f) keyword method: recalling a new word by locating a well-known word in your own tongue that sounds similar to or similarly mimics the new term; and (g) transfer: employing existing language skills or expertise to support in production.

Furthermore, Lavoie ( 2016 ) proposed three vocabulary training strategies: word family (or word parts), word network, and word card strategies. A word family is a group of words comprising a root word (such as clear) and its pronunciations, created by adding different suffixes and prefixes (such as clearance, clearing, and clearly). The lexical components used in the word network strategy are processed at varying depths. Deep processing entails understanding the word's meaning, while shallow processing just considers its form. The purpose of the word card technique is to aid in learning new vocabulary by associating the shape of a word with its meaning through flashcards. This method facilitates the integration of visual and verbal data, which improves the recall of lexical items. Alqahtani ( 2015 ) claimed that effectively used word cards can help learn and review words.

Gamified technology in vocabulary instructions

The term "gamification" describes the application of game components, such as action language, evaluation, challenge, control, environment, game fiction, human interaction, immersion, and goals, to learning and associated consequences (Landers, 2014 ). A key consideration in the design of games for learning is striking a balance between the requirement to cover the subject matter and the desire to prioritize gameplay; this is what we mean when we talk about "gamification" of language acquisition (Plass et al., 2015 ; Waluyo & Tran, 2023 ). Rashid et al. ( 2019 ) argued that utilizing language games can help create an engaging learning environment and improve students' vocabulary mastery. It is believed that gamified vocabulary learning in the classroom or a formal setting and outside the classroom or informal setting can successfully enhance language learning as it makes language acquisition easier and quicker for students (Gokbulut, 2020 ; Wardoyo et al., 2021 ). Accordingly, gamified vocabulary instruction is one way to engage learners in learning words in a fun environment while still providing them with thorough vocabulary instruction. Therefore, an effective vocabulary game allows players to learn in interesting and pertinent circumstances, where crucial information is provided on schedule and appropriate for gamers (Anggoro & Pratiwi, 2023 ; Landers, 2014 ).

In the past, several vocabulary games were used to enhance students’ vocabulary acquisition, including draw games, circle games, vocabulary exchange games, verb group games, prefixes, word formation games, vocabulary dice games, and irregular verb matches. With the development of technology, gamified vocabulary learning has moved to digital tools utilizing CALL and MALL. Digital games are the modern version of game-based learning teachers employ to engage students in meaningful and engaging activities (Rachels & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2018 ). Some empirical studies have proved that interactive response system platforms are appropriate to meet students’ needs in vocabulary learning as well as teachers’ needs to facilitate vocabulary learning, including Google Form, Socrative, Kahoot!, Quizizz, and Quizlet (Anggoro & Khasanah, 2022 ; Pratiwi & Waluyo, 2023 ).

• Flipped classroom

F-L-I-P—flexible environment, learning culture, intentional content, and professional educators—forms the flip model (Marshall & Kostka, 2020 ). It emphasizes active learning and the change from teacher-centered to student-centered instruction (Pratiwi et al., 2022 ). Flipped classrooms invert classroom activity and implies learners do schoolwork at home and homework at school (Anggoro & Khasanah, 2022 ; Pratiwi et al., 2022 ). Students are responsible for outside-classroom activities like watching videos, browsing course-related web pages, listening to audio, reading appropriate sources, etc. On the other hand, Teachers have to encourage pair work, group collaboration, hands-on activities, and high-level thinking by creating an engaged classroom atmosphere. Students are not restricted by the amount of time spent in class because instruction can take place in a variety of other settings (Marshall & Kostka, 2020 ). Flipped classrooms increase class time for practice and activities rather than language ideas. This helps students produce and learn more (Nurhidayat et al., 2021 ; Wannapiroon & Petsangsri, 2020 ).

According to Egbert et al. ( 2015 ), characteristics of the flipped classroom include the following: (1) a focus on learning rather than simply conforming to school norms; (2) the teacher's role as a tutor rather than a director; (3) greater student–teacher interaction centered on the content; (4) frequent opportunities for students to apply what they have learned; (5) frequent opportunities for students to receive feedback on their actions and progress; (6) the integration of technology into the learning process; and (7) the delivery of instruction at the precise moment it's needed. Teachers distribute the subject matter outside the classroom to let students collaborate and share understanding inside the classroom (Pratiwi & Waluyo, 2023 ). Therefore, flipped classrooms encourage active learning, deeper knowledge, and motivation (Anggoro & Khasanah, 2022 ; Mahalli et al., 2020 ; Pratiwi et al., 2022 ).

Research showed that EFL students benefited from flipped classrooms (Anggoro & Khasanah, 2022 ; Pratiwi et al., 2022 ; Talan & Gulsecen, 2019 ; Teng, 2017 ). Pratiwi and Waluyo ( 2022 ) argued that technology might be used to offer a self-paced learning environment that supports students' mastery of learning. The flipped classroom allows teachers to incorporate supporting features like tests for learning, problem-based inquiries, and differentiation strategies to provide a more flexible learning environment than typical classrooms (Pratiwi et al., 2022 ). Anggoro and Khasanah ( 2022 ) found out that students enjoy participating in a flipped classroom and benefit from watching their lectures in shorter lesson videos. Similarly, Talan and Gulsecen ( 2019 ) and Teng ( 2017 ) stated that learners were satisfied with the flipped classroom model in the EFL setting.

Methodology

Research design

This study employed a sequential explanatory research design—a mixed method design in which, after a quantitative phase, the researcher conducts a qualitative phase to explain the quantitative data. The primary focus was on the quantitative phase by examining the effectiveness of flipped classroom with a gamified technology compared to a paper-based method in teaching vocabulary to students with high- and low- proficiency levels. Therefore, the participants were divided into the gamified technology group and the paper-based method group. The qualitative phase was implemented to further clarify the preliminary findings and how the qualitative data contributed to the explanation of the quantitative findings. This study's second phase was teachers’ reflection on flipped classrooms in teaching vocabulary with gamified technology and a paper-based method. Figure  1 illustrates the research design.

The game-based method group utilized several gamified technological tools to deliver the materials in flipped classroom model. The tools belong to the Students Responsive System (SRS), which was divided into two parts: pre-class/outside the classroom ( Quizlet ) and inside the classroom ( Kahoot! , Quizizz, Socrative, and Google Form ). Google Form was also used to facilitate teachers’ reflection. On the other hand, the paper-based method group used paper for all learning processes, inside and outside the classroom. The vocabulary sets were taken from the Academic Word List (AWL)—terms that are not often taught in elementary English classes but have a high frequency of use or a wide range of contexts in the scientific community—frequent words in the scientific literature. The sets used in this study consisted of 300 words divided into 10 vocabulary lists (1 per week, 1 vocabulary list). Each vocabulary list had 30 words.

The course spanned 12 sessions, each lasting 100 min per week. Both the control and experimental groups followed an identical learning process, commencing with a pretest in week 1, followed by vocabulary instruction covering sets 1 to 10 from weeks 2 to 11, culminating in a post-test in week 12. In the initial session, students undertook a pretest and received materials for vocabulary set 1. Vocabulary teaching was executed within a flipped classroom framework, combining in-class and out-of-class learning. Outside classroom resources were dispensed a week prior to the class, for instance, vocabulary set 1, given at the conclusion of week 1 and employed in week 2. The control groups employed physical documents stored in folders, whereas the experimental groups accessed a Quizlet link. Within the classroom setting, the teacher provided additional support and facilitated discussions to encourage peer feedback. While the control groups adhered to traditional paper-based methods and classroom setups, the experimental groups leveraged gamified technological platforms. The final session encompassed a post-test for both groups. The details of this learning process are outlined in Table 1 .

Context and participants

This study involved the 1st-year students of an Indonesian university who took a General English course in the 2nd semester of the academic year 2022–2023. All of them were non-English major students. The total population was 216 students. In this study, groups of people with similar features were selected at random from the population using a stratified sampling method. The sample was characterized based on students’ majors. After employing the sampling method, this study involved 144 students divided into 6 classes ranging from 18 to 21 years old (male = 83,33%, female = 16,67%).

There were 3 classes as control groups (C) and 3 classes as experimental groups (E), in which each class consisted of 24 students. Further, the participants of each group were divided into two proficiency levels: high (H) and low (L), based on their entrance test result. Students were categorized according to university academic standards, wherein a minimum score of 60 denoted high proficiency. The control group comprised 72 students (21 high proficiency and 51 low proficiency), mirroring the composition of the experimental group, which also included 72 students (24 high proficiency and 48 low proficiency). The students’ background information can be seen in Table 2 .

Considering the teachers who participated in this study, 3 teachers taught 2 classes each: one control and one experimental group. All participants, both students, and teachers, have been informed to get their agreement to participate in this study and that their participation would be anonymous and confidential. Additional information for the students that their participation would not affect their course grades.

Data collection and instruments

The data for the study were gathered from students’ test scores (pretest and posttest) and teachers’ guided reflection. The pretest was used to know learners’ proficiency levels and check their basic vocabulary knowledge. It consisted of 50 questions from vocabulary lists. All questions were in multiple-choice items, including words’ definitions, sentence completion, part of speech, synonyms, and antonyms. Each component consisted of 10 numbers. The posttest was used to measure the effectiveness of the treatment given in vocabulary training. It differed in wording, yet, in the same format and level of difficulty as the pretest in order to avoid the threat to internal validity. All tests were done in the Socrative application for the experimental groups, while for control groups were given paper-based tests. The reliability of the test has been measured through internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha value, in which test–retest reliability was implemented. Based on the reliability statistics, Cronbach’s alpha value of the tests is 0.731, with a range of 0.709 to 0.760 for each item. An instrument is valid if Cronbach’s alpha value > 0.70. It means that all the test items are reliable. In the meantime, two separate raters—a native speaker from the United Kingdom and a native-like from the Philippines—check the correctness through content validity. Some grammatical errors and inappropriate words have been revised based on their feedback; subsequently, both validated that all items were valid.

Reflective learning in professional education covers what is being done, why it is being done, and how well students are learning. In this study, the teachers were asked to write their reflections on vocabulary learning using flipped classrooms with a gamified technology and a paper-based method in terms of vocabulary teaching strategies and the impact of the strategy in the classroom. 10 questions were given to guide the teachers in writing their reflections. The guided reflection was given in Google Form so that the teachers could easily write their teaching reflections under the questions given.

Data analysis

Since this study employed a sequential explanatory research design, the analyses were done based on quantitative and qualitative data; then, the results were combined to obtain more rigorous answers to the research questions. SPSS software was used to analyze the quantitative data, while the qualitative data were described to support the quantitative data. The quantitative data consisted of a pretest and a posttest, while the qualitative data consisted of teachers’ reflection results.

Before analyzing the quantitative data, the normality of the data was examined through the value of Skewness and Kurtosis. If the Skewness and Kurtosis values ranged between − 2 and + 2, it indicated the normal distribution. After checking the results, the data indicated normal distribution or homogenous (Table 3 ), so the collected data were analyzed using a Parametric test. Specifically, the following statistical techniques were employed:

To examine the effectiveness of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based methods in teaching vocabulary for high- and low- proficiency students, Paired-sample t-tests were conducted on students’ pretest and posttest scores.

To compare the efficacy of flipped classrooms with gamified technology and paper-based methods for teaching vocabulary to students with high and low proficiency, an ANOVA was conducted on the students' pre- and post-test scores, and the results were supported by a mean plot.

To reveal teachers’ perception of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method in teaching vocabulary, thematic analysis was employed to add an insightful point of view based on teachers’ perspectives.

To confirm the homogeneity of the data, a descriptive statistic was run in SPSS 25 among the pretest and posttest of both control and experimental groups. The mean of the control group (N = 72) increased from 47.750 (SD = 15.513) to 53.833 (SD = 14.931), while in the experimental group (N = 72) improved from 37.527 (SD = 11.105) to 46.694 (SD = 15.224). Skewness and Kurtosis values in all data ranged between + 2 and − 2 ( Skewness  = 0.299, 0.096, 0.279, 0.517; Kurtosis  = −0.840, −0.657, 0.342, −0.136), so the data were homogenous and could be analyzed using parametric tests.

Flipped classroom with gamified technology for teaching vocabulary

The results of Paired sample t-test in the experimental group showed a significant difference between the pretest and posttest in gamified technology classes ( Sig.  = 0.001) with a mean improvement of 6.083 ( SD  = 14.219, t  = -3.630, df  = 71). The Pearson coefficient indicated a moderate correlation between the pretest and posttest ( r  = 0.564). The effect size resulted in a medium effect between the pretest and posttest ( d  = 0.427). The results imply that gamified technology has effects in improving students’ learning outcomes with medium effect size railway polytechnic students (Table 4 ).

Based on proficiency level, high-proficiency learners lessened their learning outcome with a mean reduction of 3.047 ( SD  = 13.320, t  = 1.048, df  = 20). The results of paired sample t-test showed no difference between the pretest and posttest ( Sig.  = 0.509) with weak correlation ( r  = 0.153) and small effect size ( d  = 0.153). These results reveal that gamified technology has no effect on students’ learning outcomes toward high-proficiency students. On the other hand, low-proficiency learners improved their scores significantly with a mean upgrade of 9.843 ( SD  = 12.911, t  = -5.444, df  = 50). The paired sample t-test presented a significant difference between the pretest and postest ( Sig.  = 0.000) with weak correlation ( r  = 0.371) and medium effect size ( d  = 0.762). These results demonstrate that gamified technology significantly affects low-proficiency students’ learning outcomes with a medium effect size.

Flipped classroom with paper-based method for teaching vocabulary

A Paired sample t-test was run in the control group to know the effect of the paper-based method for vocabulary teaching in a flipped classroom setting. The results showed that the paper-based method had a significant difference in the pretest and posttest ( Sig.  = 0.000) with a mean improvement of 9.166 ( SD  = 16.913, t  = −4.599, df  = 71). The Pearson coefficient described a very low correlation between the pretest and posttest ( r  = 0.085) with medium size effect ( d  = 0.541). The results of the analysis reveal that the paper-based method has effects to improve students’ scores on vocabulary teaching in flipped classroom settings toward railway polytechnic students in general (Table 5 ).

Further, the analysis indicated different results when it was analyzed based on the students’ level of proficiency. High-proficiency learners enhanced their scores by very low points (0.166), while low-proficiency learners enhanced higher points (13.833). The paper-based method had no difference on high-proficiency learners ( Sig  = 0.957, SD = 14.825, t  = 0.055, df  = 23) between the pretest and posttest with a very low correlation ( r  = 0.040) and very small effect ( d  = 0.011). On the other hand, the method had a significant difference in low-proficiency learners ( Sig  = 0.000, SD = 16.057, t  = −5.969, df  = 47) between the pretest and posttest with very high correlation ( r  = 0.858) and large small effect ( d  = 0.861). These results reveal that the paper-based method impacts low-proficiency learners to enhance their vocabulary scores, yet, it has no effect on high-proficiency learners.

Comparison of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method

Comparing the test results of experimental and control groups in one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in students’ vocabulary learning outcomes ( Sig  = 0.000). The students got different results in vocabulary teaching using gamified technology and paper-based method. The results were also found across high-proficiency learners of both groups ( Sig  = 0.001). It implies that there was a significant difference in their vocabulary learning outcomes among high-proficiency learners. However, across low-proficiency learners of experimental and control groups showed no difference in their average scores ( Sig  = 0.172). It reveals that low-proficiency students had no different results in learning using gamified technology or paper-based method. The results were supported by Tukey HSD analysis, which described no difference among low-proficiency students from the control and experimental groups and high-proficiency students from the control group. High-proficiency learners from experimental groups had different results among other groups of learners (Table 6 ).

Overall, the control group students got higher improvement ( M  = 9.167) than the experimental group ( M  = 6.083). Based on proficiency levels, the highest improvement was in low-proficiency learners in the control group (M = 13.833), followed by low-proficiency learners in the experimental group ( M  = 9.843). Nonetheless, there was no improvement in the high-proficiency learners’ group. The analysis showed that the results slightly deteriorated for high-proficiency students in the control group ( M  = −0.167), and the peak decrease happened in high-proficiency students in the experimental group ( M  = −3.048). These results reveal that low-proficiency learners achieve higher scores in the paper-based method rather than in gamified technology during the teaching and learning process in flipped classroom settings. While high-proficiency learners could maintain their scores in the paper-based method, their average scores were decreased in gamified technology. However, high-proficiency learners still got higher results than low-proficiency students in both control (paper-based) and experimental (gamified technology) groups (Fig. 2 ).

Teachers’ perceptions

Thematic analysis was done on the results of teachers-guided reflective writing. The results were categorized into two main themes based on the treatment given to each group of students: gamified technology and paper-based method. Each theme consisted of four elements: process, effect, problem, and alternative solution. Three teachers were coded as T and a continuous number (T1, T2, and T3). At last, the results of the thematic analysis were summarized and checked with the previous findings. The details are presented below.

Flipped classroom with gamified technology

Flipped classrooms with gamified technology allowed students to study before class so they were prepared when they arrived. Further, the students could learn independently instead of creating learning habits massively, which led to active learning. Gamified technology is considered to improve learners’ enjoyment during the teaching and learning process.

T2: The impacts of this method are: students can learn independently, create learning habits massively, feel curious about new things, and create contextual experiences, and this is student-centered learning where the students involve actively in the process of learning.

While this approach was expected to enhance vocabulary instruction for teachers and students, several challenges emerged. Particularly prominent were issues related to internet connectivity due to the prohibition of mobile phones in the classroom. The students relied on Wi-Fi during their in-class learning, leading to occasional disruptions. These problems resulted in hurdles that diminished students' engagement with the gamified technology-driven flipped classroom approach. Moreover, the restricted access to learning materials contradicted the flexible learning environment inherent to the flipped classroom model. Consequently, it is recommended to enhance internet connectivity services and permit students unrestricted use of their mobile phones to bolster their learning journey.

T3: However, the things that matter related to digital things are the connection to the internet. Sometimes, if the internet connection is low, the students cannot access the material given. In this case, the students are also prohibited from using their cell phones, and the internet connection is only allowed in classes and certain specified places. Thus, the students could not access it anytime they wanted due to limited internet connection. T1: As today is in the era of society 5.0, I think the students should get free access to their phones in order to support their learning experience outside the classroom, instead of improving internet connection services so that online learning materials can be easily accessible for them.

Flipped classroom with paper-based method

Since the students had difficulties accessing the material in gamified technology due to the internet connection, the teachers thought the paper-based method could be an alternative solution. However, the paper-based was a conventional method that could create students' boredom. Thus, teachers had to monitor students’ progress when implementing flipped classroom model, both in gamified technology or paper-based method.

T1: Flipped classrooms help Z-generation students learn English since they like using the internet. In the absence of the internet, paper-based material may work. These strategies are unlikely to succeed when students' motivation and self-regulation are poor. Flipped classrooms require teacher support.

Learning through the paper-based method needed extra work for both students and teachers. The students had to keep the paper which was easily broken, while the teachers were encouraged to motivate the students in order to achieve learning goals.

T2: Paper is not durable; it leads to breaking into pieces once it catches water/rain. T3: Since the paper-based method is conventional, the teacher/lecturer needs to motivate students and analyze their progress toward learning goals.

Effective method for students with different proficiency levels

Learning in the flipped classroom setting is new and unconventional as well as challenging. Teachers have to do more preparation for the materials given to study outside the classroom before class. Having team teaching and collaboration with other English teachers might help to reduce the challenge. Yet, the students have to be motivated to have high self-regulation to learn outside the classroom to fulfill the learning goals. After teaching for 10 weeks, the teachers concluded that high-proficiency students could learn effectively with gamified technology and paper-based methods. However, gamified technology is supposed to be more effective. On the other hand, low-proficiency students were more effective in learning vocabulary in the paper-based method since internet connection problems and limited access to mobile phones became the main issues. Learning through paper would lessen their challenges as they did not need additional effort to open online materials.

T1 and T2: The game-based method seems more fun and effective for high-pro students, while low-proficiency students use paper-based methods. T3: In my opinion, both methods could be given to high-proficiency students, but gamified technology is more challenging than paper-based. The students can use the internet and meet the new material given in different ways than usual. It will motivate them to join the method given. For low-proficiency students, the flipped classroom method is challenging and needs more effort if the students do not meet the maturity level of learning and have low self-regulation. Studying in a paper-based method will be less effort for them since it does not cause any confusion in implementing it rather than in gamified technology.

The primary objective of the present study is to conduct a comparative analysis between flipped classrooms employing gamified technology and traditional paper-based methods in the context of teaching vocabulary. The study incorporates students' proficiency levels as a moderator variable, recognizing its pivotal role in shaping the methods of instruction within English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms. The research design follows a sequential explanatory approach, with the initial quantitative findings showcasing the effectiveness of the gamified technology-driven flipped classroom model. This approach emerges as notably beneficial in enhancing overall vocabulary learning outcomes and specifically for students with low proficiency. These findings align with prior research indicating positive impacts of gamified technology on students' vocabulary scores (Gokbulut, 2020 ; Rashid et al., 2019 ; Wardoyo et al., 2021 ) and its potential to yield significant improvements for low-proficiency students (Waluyo & Bakoko, 2021 ; Waluyo & Bucol, 2021 ). However, it is intriguing to note that this approach does not exhibit similar effectiveness for high-proficiency students, a contrast to the presumed notion that technology should invariably enhance learners' achievements (Cripps, 2020 ).

This discrepancy could potentially be attributed to various factors. For instance, limitations on mobile phone usage imposed by university regulations might hinder the high-proficiency students' engagement with the gamified technology. Moreover, challenges in maintaining a consistent internet connection during the teaching and learning process, both within and outside the classroom, could further impact the efficacy of the gamified approach. Consequently, high-proficiency students might need to invest more concerted efforts when navigating vocabulary learning through gamified technology within the flipped classroom framework. These intricate dynamics underscore the nuanced interplay between technological integration, pedagogical context, and regulatory constraints, which collectively influence the outcomes of vocabulary instruction for students across varying proficiency levels.

The second finding informed the effectiveness of flipped classroom with the paper-based method, which resulted in the same description as the first finding. It is effective for students in general and low-proficiency levels, yet, not for high-proficiency students. These results manifested a discrepancy toward some empirical studies, which claimed that most treatments were neglected for low-proficiency learners yet performed on those at high-proficiency levels (Alqahtani, 2015 ; Alshammari, 2022 ). In this study, both treatments accomplish to low-proficiency students but abort for high-proficiency students.

Comparing both treatments, the third finding explains that the paper-based method is more effective in boosting students' vocabulary scores than gamified technology, both in general conditions and at different proficiency levels. It discloses slight differences with other reports that have examined gamified technology and paper-based method. For instance, Rachels and Rockinson-Szapkiw ( 2018 ) found no difference between the learning outcomes of the class that utilized gamification and the paper-based method. In the present study, gamified technology is not effective might be caused by internet connection problems and the limitation of mobile access, making it difficult for students to study at their own pace. The integration of digital game applications, which are anticipated to be enjoyable, convenient, and user-friendly (Landers, 2014 ; Plass et al., 2015 ), presents a challenge as students are limited to accessing them exclusively through laptops in locations with reliable internet connectivity, such as the library, classroom, or canteen. Consequently, the utilization of gamified technology falls short of aligning with the inherent goal of the flipped classroom model to establish a student-centric learning environment both within and beyond the traditional confines of the classroom. This impediment becomes particularly evident in the context of outside classroom engagement, where the students' ability to interact with the materials is hindered by the stringent physical environment and the absence of adequate infrastructure.

The motivation of creating a well-rounded student-centred learning atmosphere that extends seamlessly from in-class to out-of-class experiences encounters hindrances due to the restrictive reliance on laptops and stable internet connections for accessing gamified technology. This limitation not only disrupts the envisioned fluidity of the flipped classroom approach but also hampers the broader objective of fostering independent and flexible learning experiences for students. The resulting scenario underscores the need for a more comprehensive and accessible technological infrastructure to effectively realize the aspirations of the flipped classroom pedagogy, which places a strong emphasis on facilitating a holistic and dynamic learning environment for students within and beyond the conventional classroom boundaries.

In the last findings, the teachers confirmed that flipped classroom promotes independent and active learning as it offers a student-centered model. It is consistent with the concept of the flipped classroom that engages students’ participation in the classroom since they have learned outside the classroom without restriction (Anggoro & Khasanah, 2022 ; Egbert et al., 2015 ; Pratiwi et al., 2022 ). Although flipped classroom reinforces technology integration, the teachers prefer to teach using the paper-based method for low-proficiency students. On the other hand, gamified technology is more relevant for high-proficiency students. This notion arises due to the challenges that have to be encountered in studying through gamified technology.

It is worth mentioning that flipped classroom successfully facilitates vocabulary teaching to improve students’ vocabulary learning outcomes. Outside classroom activities give a chance for students to practice and assist their vocabulary comprehension, while inside the classroom could be used to reconstruct vocabulary knowledge to stimulate active learning. This assumption aligns with the vocabulary training strategies that Lavoie ( 2016 ) and Miller ( 1995 ) proposed. Considering the vocabulary teaching method, gamified technology or paper-based method could be implemented as those two methods result in equivalence in students’ vocabulary scores enhancement. Therefore, teachers are advised to analyze students’ proficiency levels and check educational infrastructure before determining teaching methods in the classroom to avoid unnecessary challenges.

This study has revealed the effectiveness of flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method. The results showed a non-significant difference in gamified technology, yet there has been a significant difference in the paper-based method. It informs that the paper-based method is more effective than gamified technology in teaching vocabulary for non-English major students in general or in different learners’ proficiency. To some extent, the result differs from previous studies due to challenges that emerged during the teaching process. It also contradicts teachers’ belief that assumed gamified technology is more effective for high-proficiency learners while the paper-based method is more effective for low-proficiency learners. Technology limitation creates another issue that provokes students to not learn in their convenient learning environment. Indeed, it is difficult to assess the learning materials. Hence, gamified technology method could not effectively improve students’ vocabulary scores; even this method decreases students’ scores.

As much as this study intends to offer, several limitations have to be acknowledged. The present study focuses on teaching vocabulary and teachers’ reflection. Students’ perceptions are not examined, so the teaching method implemented from students’ points of view cannot be analyzed further. Moreover, there are some challenges due to the technological devices that create obstacles during the teaching process. It is suggested for future research to analyze based on students’ points of view and equip learning environment.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available because the participants gave consent to use of their data only for the purpose of the research, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Alqahtani, M. (2015). The importance of vocabulary in language learning and how to be taught. International Journal of Teaching and Education, III (3), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.20472/te.2015.3.3.002

Article   Google Scholar  

Alshammari, H. A. (2022). Investigating the low English proficiency of Saudi EFL learners. Arab World English Journal, 13 (1), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no1.9

Anggoro, K. J., & Khasanah, U. (2022). A flipped classroom model to improve students’ online EFL. TESOL Journal, 13 (1), e631. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.631

Anggoro, K. J., & Pratiwi, D. I. (2023). University students’ perceptions of interactive response system in an English language course: A case of Pear Deck. Research in Learning Technology, 31 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v31.2944

Cripps, T. (2020). We are mobile magicians but digital refugees: Helping prospective english teachers explore technology and ubiquitous learning. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 17 , 168–189.

Egbert, J., Herman, D., & Lee, H. (2015). Flipped instruction in english language teacher education: A design–based study in a complex, open–ended learning environment. Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal, 19 (2), 1–23.

Google Scholar  

Gokbulut, B. (2020). The effect of mentimeter and kahoot applications on university students’ e-learning. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 12 (2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v12i2.4814

Kariadi, M. T., & Pratiwi, D. I. (2022). Revealing university students ’ attitudes toward English language learning in Indonesian contexts. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 19 (3), 1053–1062. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2022.19.3.20.1053

Landers, R. N. (2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation and Gaming, 45 (6), 752–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114563660

Lavoie, C. (2016). The effect of training on vocabulary strategy use: Explicit teaching of word family, word network and word card strategies. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 6 (1), 20–34.

Ludwig, C. (2018). Using vocabulary apps to enhance students’ vocabulary knowledge. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 9 (3), 306–323. https://doi.org/10.37237/090305

Mahalli, N. J., Mujiyanto, J., & Yuliasri, I. (2020). Students’ perception of blended learning implementation in EFL learning. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 11 (8), 161–172.

Marshall, H. W., & Kostka, I. (2020). Fostering teaching presence through the synchronous online flipped learning approach. Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal, 24 (2), 1–14.

Miller, J. (1995). Teaching tips: teaching vocabulary. Mextesol Journal . https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2015.11494351

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press . https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759

Nurhidayat, E., Mujiyanto, J., Yuliasri, I., & Hartono, R. (2021). Pre-service English teachers’ acceptance of technology. English Language Teaching, Literature, and Translation (ELTLT), 2021 , 19–25.

Panmei, B., & Waluyo, B. (2022). The pedagogical use of gamification in English vocabulary training and learning in higher education. Education Sciences, 13 (1), 1–22.

Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50 (4), 258–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533

Pratiwi, D. I., Ubaedillah, U., Puspitasari, A., & Arifianto, T. (2022). Flipped classroom in online speaking class at Indonesian university context. International Journal of Instruction, 15 (2), 697–714. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15238a

Pratiwi, D. I., & Waluyo, B. (2022). Integrating task and game-based learning into an online TOEFL preparatory course during the COVID-19 outbreak at two Indonesian higher education institutions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 19 (2), 37–67. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2022.19.2.2

Pratiwi, D. I., & Waluyo, B. (2023). Autonomous learning and the use of digital technologies in online English classrooms in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology . https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13094

Rachels, J. R., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2018). The effects of a mobile gamification app on elementary students’ Spanish achievement and self-efficacy. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31 (1–2), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1382536

Rashid, R. A., Lim, S. S. L., Nordin, N. I. N., Salam, W. N. W., Wahab, N. A. A., & Ayub, A. (2019). Learners’ perceptions of a creative language game-based program. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 7 (9), 181–196.

Renandya, W. A., Hamied, F. A., & Nurkamto, J. (2018). English language proficiency in Indonesia: issues and prospects. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 15 (3), 618–629. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2018.15.3.4.618

Talan, T., & Gulsecen, S. (2019). The effect of a flipped classroom on students’ achievements, academic engagement and satisfaction levels. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 20 (4), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.17718/TOJDE.640503

Teng, M. F. (2017). Flipping the classroom and tertiary level EFL students’ academic performance and satisfaction. Journal of Asia TEFL, 14 (4), 605–620. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.4.2.605

Ueno, J. (2019). Developing autonomy through conversation exchange: a case study of ESL learners. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 22 (4), 1–17.

Wahyuni, S., Mujiyanto, J., Rukmini, D., Fitriati, S. W., & Handoyo, B. (2020). Integrating edmodo into English instruction: Students’ perceptions and its contribution to autonomous learning. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9 (2), 1590–1595.

Waluyo, B., & Bakoko, R. (2021). Vocabulary list learning supported by gamification: classroom action research using Quizlet. Journal of Asia TEFL, 18 (1), 289–299.

Waluyo, B., & Bucol, J. L. (2021). The impact of gamified vocabulary learning using quizlet on low-proficiency students. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 22 (1), 164–185.

Waluyo, B., & Tran, H. M. (2023). Implementing gamified vocabulary learning in asynchronous mode. TEFLIN Journal, 34 (1), 136–156.

Wannapiroon, N., & Petsangsri, S. (2020). Effects of steamification model in flipped classroom learning environment on creative thinking and creative innovation. TEM Journal, 9 (4), 1647–1655. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM94-42

Wardoyo, C., Satrio, Y. D., Narmaditya, B. S., & Wibowo, A. (2021). Do technological knowledge and game-based learning promote students achievement: Lesson from Indonesia. Heliyon, 7 (11), e08467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08467

Wijayatiningsih, T. D., Bharati, D. A. L., Faridi, A., & Fitriati, S. W. (2022). Scaffolding for learners’ writing literacy through blended learning in an Indonesian EFL context. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 19 (1), 336–344. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2022.19.1.26.336

Wu, J. G. (2019). The use of mobile devices in language learning: a survey on Chinese university learners’ experiences. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 20 (3), 6–20.

Yue, N. (2017). Computer multimedia assisted English vocabulary teaching courseware. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12 (12), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.3991/IJET.V12I12.7955

Download references

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.

Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Jl. Kelud Utara III Petompon, Gajahmungkur, Semarang, 50237, Indonesia

Damar Isti Pratiwi, Sri Wuli Fitriati & Issy Yuliasri

Walailak University, Tha Sala, Thailand

Budi Waluyo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

DIP made contributions to design the study, wrote introduction, literature review, and analyzed the datasets. SWF made contributions to write abstract, introduction, and interpreted the results of the study. IY made contributions to wrote literature review and decided the research methodology used in the study. BW made contributions to wrote research methodology, conclusion and reference lists. All authors read and reviewed the manuscript, then approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sri Wuli Fitriati .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate.

A statement on ethics approval was obtained from PPI Madiun, and informed consent were obtained from all 147 participants before they take part in the study.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have 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 licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence 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 licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Pratiwi, D.I., Fitriati, S.W., Yuliasri, I. et al. Flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method for teaching vocabulary. Asian. J. Second. Foreign. Lang. Educ. 9 , 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00222-4

Download citation

Received : 21 June 2023

Accepted : 26 October 2023

Published : 01 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00222-4

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

• Gamified technology
• Paper-based

International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research

• Announcements
• Editorial Board
• Submit a Paper
• Publication Ethics
• ##PAPER TEMPLATE##
• ##Retraction Policy##

Innovative Teaching: A Qualitative Review of Flipped Classrooms

The extent and importance of web-based learning in higher education have increased tremendously in the last decade, triggered by new educational technologies and pedagogical approaches. Higher education lecturing has traditionally followed a teacher-centered approach, with lecturers giving classes in the classroom and students performing out-of-class activities. Under this traditional approach, the main actor in the teaching-learning process is the lecturer, while students play a passive role. The flipped classroom emphasizes the role of the student in the center of the learning environment and facilities an active learning pedagogy. This paper reviews the most recent case studies related to the flipped classroom approach in order to provide educators guidelines on the best practices, traits, and merits of the flipped classroom. A total of 22 case studies were included in this qualitative review of the flipped classroom. The methodological inquiry followed the PRISMA flow diagram that identified an initial pool of 3,764 articles. Upon identification of relevant case studies (n=22), a five-point Likert-type sentiment rating was assigned as the basis to structure the discussion. The rating was based on the students’ perceptions of the flipped classrooms as investigated in the articles. The assessment confirms that the majority of students have a positive perception of this learning pedagogy. However, there are concerns about increased workload for students, ambiguity in expected learning outcomes, and an initial barrier to actively contribute; these are the primary implications of this review.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.3.2

Abdekhoda, M., Maserat, E., & Ranjbaran, F. (2020). A conceptual model of flipped classroom adoption in medical higher education. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 17(4), 393-401. doi:10.1108/ITSE-09-2019-0058

Alamri, M. M. (2019). Students' academic achievement performance and satisfaction in a flipped classroom in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(1), 103-119. doi:10.1504/IJTEL.2019.096786

Alebrahim, F., & Ku, H. Y. (2020). Perceptions of student engagement in the flipped classroom: a case study. Educational Media International, 57(2), 128-147. doi:10.1080/09523987.2020.1786776

Aljaraideh, Y. (2019). Students' perception of flipped classroom: A case study for private universities in Jordan. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(3), 368-377. doi:10.3926/jotse.648

Almisad, B. (2019). Perceptions of the'flipped classroom': a case study from a developing country. International Journal of Learning Technology, 14(1), 78-98. doi:10.1504/IJLT.2019.100617

Al-Natour, S., & Turetken, O. (2020). A comparative assessment of sentiment analysis and star ratings for consumer reviews. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102132. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102132

Aprianto, E., & Purwati, O. (2020). Multimedia-Assisted Learning in a Flipped Classroom: A Case Study of Autonomous Learning on EFL University Students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 15(24), 114-127. doi:10.3991/ijet.v15i24.14017

Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269-283. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.013

Bicen, H., & Beheshti, M. (2019). Assessing perceptions and evaluating achievements of ESL students with the usage of infographics in a flipped classroom learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-29. doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1666285

Bhat, S., Raju, R., Bhat, S., & D’Souza, R. (2020). Redefining quality in engineering education through the flipped classroom model. Procedia Computer Science, 172, 906-914. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.131

Cai, J., Yang, H. H., Gong, D., MacLeod, J., & Zhu, S. (2019). Understanding the continued use of flipped classroom instruction: a personal beliefs model in Chinese higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(1), 137-155. doi:10.1007/s12528-018-9196-y

Castedo, R., López, L. M., Chiquito, M., Navarro, J., Cabrera, J. D., & Ortega, M. F. (2019). Flipped classroom—comparative case study in engineering higher education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(1), 206-216. doi:10.1002/cae.22069

Cilliers, L., & Pylman, J. (2020). South African students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom: A case study of higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-10. doi:10.1080/14703297.2020.1853588

Colomo-Magaña, E., Soto-Varela, R., Ruiz-Palmero, J., & Gómez-García, M. (2020). University students’ perception of the usefulness of the flipped classroom methodology. Education Sciences, 10(10), 275. doi:10.3390/educsci10100275

Crews, T., & Butterfield, J. (2014). Data for Flipped Classroom Design: Using Student Feedback to Identify the Best Components from Online and Face-to-Face Classes. Higher Education Studies, 4(3), 38-47. doi:10.5539/hes.v4n3p38

Fuchs, K. (2021). Evaluating The Technology-Enhanced Flipped Classroom Through The Students’ Eye: A Case Study. Proceedings of â€The 3rd International Conference on Research in Education, 2021, Vol. 1, 25-33. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14173622

Goedhart, N. S., Blignaut-van Westrhenen, N., Moser, C., & Zweekhorst, M. B. M. (2019). The flipped classroom: supporting a diverse group of students in their learning. Learning Environments Research, 22(2), 297-310. doi:10.1007/s10984-019-09281-2

Ha, A. S., O’Reilly, J., Ng, J. Y., Zhang, J. H., & Serpa, S. (2019). Evaluating the flipped classroom approach in Asian higher education: Perspectives from students and teachers. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1638147. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2019.1638147

Kay, R., MacDonald, T., & DiGiuseppe, M. (2019). A comparison of lecture-based, active, and flipped classroom teaching approaches in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(3), 449-471. doi:10.1007/s12528-018-9197-x

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 62(10), e1-e34. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006

Lo, C. K., Lie, C. W., & Hew, K. F. (2018). Applying “First Principles of Instruction†as a design theory of the flipped classroom: Findings from a collective study of four secondary school subjects. Computers & Education, 118, 150-165. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.003

Lopes, S. F. S. F., Gouveia, L. M. B., & da Cunha Reis, P. A. (2019). The Flipped Classroom and Higher Education-Experiences with Computer Science Students. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 6(10). doi:10.22161/ijaers.610.3

Martínez-Jiménez, R., & Ruiz-Jiménez, M. C. (2020). Improving students’ satisfaction and learning performance using flipped classroom. The International Journal of Management Education, 18(3), 100422. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2020.100422

Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., Sánchez, J. Ã. L., & Godoy-Caballero, A. L. (2019). How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: Effects on students' satisfaction. Computers & Education, 141, 103608. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103608

Qiu, J., Liu, C., Li, Y., & Lin, Z. (2018). Leveraging sentiment analysis at the aspects level to predict ratings of reviews. Information Sciences, 451, 295-309. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2018.04.009

Stovold, E., Beecher, D., Foxlee, R., & Noel-Storr, A. (2014). Study flow diagrams in Cochrane systematic review updates: an adapted PRISMA flow diagram. Systematic reviews, 3(1), 1-5. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-54

Stöhr, C., Demazière, C., & Adawi, T. (2020). The polarizing effect of the online flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 147, 103789. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103789

Tang, T., Abuhmaid, A. M., Olaimat, M., Oudat, D. M., Aldhaeebi, M., & Bamanger, E. (2020). Efficiency of flipped classroom with online-based teaching under COVID-19. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-12. doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1817761

Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best “blend†of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, 113-126. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003

Tomas, L., Doyle, T. and Skamp, K., 2019. Are first year students ready for a flipped classroom? A case for a flipped learning continuum. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), p.5. doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0135-4

Wilson, K. (2020). What does it mean to do teaching? A qualitative study of resistance to Flipped Learning in a higher education context. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-14. doi:10.1080/13562517.2020.1822312

• There are currently no refbacks.

e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493

• Open access
• Published: 07 January 2017

A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: possible solutions and recommendations for future research

• Chung Kwan Lo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2305-9227 1 &
• Khe Foon Hew 1  

Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning volume  12 , Article number:  4 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

101k Accesses

223 Citations

128 Altmetric

Metrics details

An increasing number of teachers are using flipped classroom approach in their teaching. This instructional approach combines video-based learning outside the classroom and interactive group learning activities inside the classroom. The purpose of the present review is to provide an overview of flipped classroom studies in K-12 education. Particularly, we put emphasis on revealing and addressing the potential challenges of flipped classroom approach. Fifteen journal publications of K-12 flipped classrooms were analyzed in terms of their flipped learning activities, student achievement, student attitude, and challenges encountered. The results suggested that a variety of pre-class (e.g., online exercises) and in-class (e.g., brief review, individual practices) activities were provided in addition to instructional videos and small-group activities respectively. The use of flipped classroom approach in K-12 education yielded a neutral or positive impact on student achievement when compared to traditional classroom. Mixed results of student attitude toward flipped classroom approach were discovered. Challenges of implementing flipped classrooms were identified and categorized into student-related challenges, faculty challenges, and operational challenges. Based on the suggestions of previous studies together with relevant empirical supports, we propose a rudimentary flipped classroom model and a set of 10 guidelines to address these challenges. Finally, several recommendations of future research are provided.

Flipped classroom approach has become a popular pedagogy in many education institutes around the world. The basic notion of flipped classroom approach is to deliver the teacher’s lectures before class through online videos, in order to free-up the in-class time for active learning and problem solving activities.

The use of flipped classroom approach has been extensively studied, especially in the contexts of higher education. Following the previous reviews (e.g., Bernard 2015 ; Betihavas et al. 2016 ; Bishop and Verleger 2013 ; Chua and Lateef 2014 ; Giannakos et al. 2014 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ; Presti 2016 ; Seery 2015 ; Zainuddin and Halili 2016 ; Zuber 2016 ), we knew that flipped classroom approach enables teachers to spend more in-class time on student-centered instructions such as group discussion and teachers’ individual assistance; that student perceptions and engagement toward flipped classroom approach are generally positive; and that some indirect educational outcomes such as improving students’ communication skills, promoting more independent learners, and changing in learning habits (e.g., revisit the online learning materials before examination) can result from the application of this instructional approach.

When compared the learning outcomes with traditional teaching, the previous reviews suggest that flipped classroom approach can improve student performance or at worst do no harm to student learning. In the published research of flipped classrooms, only a few studies (e.g., Gundlach et al. 2015 ) reported that students in traditional classroom preformed significantly better than the students in its flipped counterpart.

The major problems of using flipped classroom approach include teachers’ considerable workload of creating flipped learning materials, and students’ disengagement in the out-of-class learning. In fact, the previous reviews report that some students did not familiarize with this new learning approach and skipped the pre-class activities. In some flipped courses, a substantial amount of pre-class preparation efforts had caused students to be dissatisfied with the flipped classroom approach.

While the previous reviews have provided some useful snapshots of flipped classroom research, these reviews appear to be inadequate to inform us about the practice of flipped classroom approach in K-12 education. Some review studies limited their search only to the higher education context (e.g., Bernard 2015 ; Chua and Lateef 2014 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ; Seery 2015 ). Some other reviews examined subject disciplines that are usually offered in post-secondary education such as nursing (e.g., Betihavas et al. 2016 ; Presti 2016 ). So far, only two articles about K-12 flipped classrooms (i.e., Bergmann and Sams 2009 ; Kong 2014 ) were found and reviewed. At the time of writing, no literature review study has been done that focuses specifically on the flipped classrooms in K-12 education. A systematic review is thus necessary to investigate the implementation of K-12 flipped classrooms.

The present review contributes to the literature by examining (a) the flipped learning activities of K-12 flipped classrooms, (b) the effects of K-12 flipped classrooms, (c) K-12 students’ attitude toward the flipped courses, and (d) the challenges of implementing K-12 flipped classrooms. We then propose a rudimentary flipped classroom model and a set of guidelines to inform the future practices of flipped classroom approach in K-12 education.

An overview of flipped classroom research

There is a variety of flipped classroom research. To handle the complexity of the existing studies, we first provide an overview of flipped classroom studies through the analytical lens of de Bono’s ( 2000 ) “Six thinking hats” model. This model is a systematic thinking approach comprised of six directions: Information, feelings, constructive, creative, thinking about thought, and challenges. Six different colored hats are used to represent a direction of thinking (Table  1 ). This systematic thinking model helps us identify the research gap of current flipped classroom research.

The white hat concerns about information. A majority of studies provided explicit information of flipped classroom approach. For example, some researchers (e.g., Bhagat et al. 2016 ) administered quasi-experiments to reveal the efficacy of flipped classroom approach. DeLozier and Rhodes ( 2016 ) articulate different types of in-class and out-of-class learning activities found in the literature of flipped classroom approach. These studies enhance our understanding of the effects and current practices of flipped classroom approach.

The red hat is about emotions and feelings. Some flipped classroom studies focused on student engagement and satisfaction. For example, Gilboy et al. ( 2015 ) enhanced student engagement of their courses by using flipped classroom approach. Gross et al. ( 2015 ) found a high level of student engagement and course satisfaction in their flipped classroom. From these studies, we learn that some teachers were able to promote student engagement and course satisfaction by flipping their courses.

The blue hat focuses on the thoughts required to explore a particular issue. In the contexts of flipped classroom research, Bishop and Verleger ( 2013 ) discuss various pedagogies (e.g., cooperative learning, problem-based learning) which can be used to enhance the design of flipped classrooms. Also, they recommend using objective measures to evaluate the effects of flipped classroom approach. Abeysekera and Dawson ( 2015 ) propose adopting cognitive load theory and self-determination theory as a framework to design a flipped course. Prior to a large-scale implementation of flipped classrooms, they propose a research agenda which consists of three directions: (1) small-scale localized interventions, (2) larger scale meta-studies or systematic reviews, and (3) qualitative work into student learning and their experiences.

The green hat represents creative thinking which tries out new methods of implementing flipped classrooms. For example, Engin ( 2014 ) tried to develop students’ language skills through “student-created digital videos,” instead of the usual teacher-created videos. In other words, her students were not only a consumer of teacher-prepared materials but also a producer of learning resources. In Wang’s ( 2016 ) study, he attempted to use a mobile-assisted learning system in his flipped course. Students were thus able to study anytime and anywhere through the learning system.

The black hat is a symbol of critical thinking with a specific focus on difficulties and problems. In de Bono’s ( 2000 ) point of view, the attitude of the black hat is critically important because it “protects us from doing silly things” (p. 75). Among the published studies, very few review papers identify the challenges of implementing flipped classrooms based on empirical evidence across studies. In Betihavas et al.’s ( 2016 ) review, they categorized the challenges reported into three main themes: Student-related challenges, faculty challenges, and operational challenges. Although these three main themes basically covered all aspects of flipped classroom challenges, Betihavas et al. ( 2016 ) cautioned that their “review was limited by the small number of studies” (p. 20) specifically in nursing education. Nevertheless, their analysis has enabled a further research on the challenges of using this instructional approach.

Finally, the yellow hat adopts a constructive way of thinking. In their study, Kim et al. ( 2014 ) generated nine design principles for flipped classroom approach. These principles included providing an incentive for students to prepare for class, providing clearly defined and well-structured guidance, providing facilitation for building a learning community, among others. Kim et al. ( 2014 ), however, stressed that the nine principles were limited because they were built upon a single context of one urban university in the United States. What are some guidelines for the implementation of flipped classrooms in K-12 education? The present review intends to address this very question.

Purpose of review and research questions

The flipped classroom approach is considered as an innovation in K-12 education since 2012 (Horn 2013 ). The purpose of the present review is to understand the use of flipped learning activities, the effects of flipped classroom approach on K-12 students’ achievement and their attitude toward this new instructional approach. In addition, the challenges of using flipped classroom approach in K-12 education were identified. Based on the voices of teachers and students together with the existing literature, the overarching goal of the present review is to propose a flipped classroom model and a set of guidelines that could address these potential challenges. The present review is guided by the following questions:

What are the flipped learning activities used in K-12 flipped classrooms?

What is the effect of flipped classroom approach on K-12 students’ achievement?

What is the K-12 students’ attitude toward flipped classroom approach?

What are the main challenges of using flipped classroom approach in K-12 education?

How can we design a flipped classroom and address these possible challenges?

Definition of flipped classroom approach

The flipped classroom approach can be described as “events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa” (Lage et al. 2000 , p. 32). However, merely a re-ordering of the teaching and learning activities is insufficient to represent the practice of this instructional approach. Bishop and Verleger ( 2013 ) thus attempt to formulate a definition of flipped classroom approach. As they define, flipped classroom approach is a technology-supported pedagogy that consists of two components: (1) direct computer-based individual instruction outside the classroom through video lectures and (2) interactive group learning activities inside the classroom. In particular, their definition is rigorous in terms of the requirement of using instructional videos in the out-of-class learning component.

By adopting Bishop and Verleger’s ( 2013 ) definition, we can distinguish flipped classroom approach from some age-old strategies of class preparation. Traditionally, students were expected to prepare for class meetings by reading the textbook on their own. However, asking students to read text-based materials on their own does not involve the elements of lecturing such as teachers’ explanation and elaboration of concepts. Hence, this kind of students’ pre-class self-study cannot really capture the idea of inverting “the order in which the instructor participated in the learning process” (Jensen et al. 2015 , p. 9) of flipped classroom approach. In contrast, by using instructional videos, teachers can introduce students with new knowledge and elaborate the concept with examples before class meetings. More in-class time can thus be spent on group learning activities and solving real-world application problems with the support of teacher and peers. Therefore, we regard the use of audio or video materials (e.g., instructional videos, YouTube, screencast, Khan Academy, podcast) for out-of-class learning and regular (instead of optional) face-to-face class meetings as the two necessary elements of flipped classroom approach.

Search strategy

The process of selecting relevant literature followed the Preferred-Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) (Moher et al. 2009 ). In order to be as comprehensive as possible, the following eight electronic databases were searched: (1) Academic Search Complete, (2) British Education Index, (3) Business Source Complete, (4) Communication & Mass Media Complete, (5) ERIC, (6) Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts, (7) Teacher Reference Center, and (8) TOC Premier.

The search terms used in the present review were as follows: (“flip*” OR “invert*”) AND (“class*” OR “learn*”) AND (“K12” OR “K-12” OR “primary” OR “elementary” OR “secondary” OR “high school” OR “middle school”). In this way, the common phases of expressing flipped classroom (e.g., inverted classroom, flipped learning, flipping a class) as well as K-12 education (e.g., elementary school, secondary education) could be included.

Study selection and inclusion criteria

The inclusion and exclusion criteria of study selection were developed (Table  2 ). To be included in the present review, the studies must be published in peer-reviewed journals and written in English. The time period of our search was January 1994 to September 2016 (time of writing) since the studies prior to 1994 were unlikely to reflect the flipped classroom approach (O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ). In addition, the studies must be an empirical research reporting an implementation of flipped classrooms in any contexts of K-12 education. The flipped course must satisfy Bishop and Verleger’s ( 2013 ) definition of flipped classroom approach. Therefore, we excluded the studies that utilized only text-based materials in their out-of-class learning activities or did not offer regular face-to-face lessons.

Search outcomes

By using the search terms, a total of 936 peer-reviewed journal articles were found as of October 1, 2016. However, a number of articles were removed due to replication across databases. Also, a large number of articles were found to be irrelevant after reviewing the title and abstract, particularly those were not empirical research or did not involve K-12 students. A snowballing procedure was also executed by tracking the existing literature reviews of flipped classroom research which did not limit their study within the contexts of higher education (i.e., Bishop and Verleger 2013 ; Giannakos et al. 2014 ; Zainuddin and Halili 2016 ). An additional 78 records were then identified and scanned. However, only two articles were found to be an empirical study of K-12 flipped classrooms. As a result, 17 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, but two of the studies were excluded since only text-based materials were provided for students’ class preparation. The final selection yielded a total of 15 articles. Figure  1 outlines the process of article selection.

PRISMA flow diagram of article selection

Data extraction and analysis

The two authors contributed to the extraction and categorization of data. Data included author(s), year of publication, research context, flipped learning activities (i.e., pre-class, in-class, and after-class activities), major findings, problems encountered, and proposed solutions or preventive strategies to the problems. In particular, the problems identified were analyzed and categorized into three themes defined by Betihavas et al. ( 2016 ): (1) student-related challenges, (2) faculty challenges, and (3) operational challenges. The data in each theme were then summarized and synthesized. In the event of disagreements regarding the data extraction and analysis, the authors re-examined the studies in question together in order to come to a consensus.

The present review yielded 15 empirical studies of K-12 flipped classrooms. The major findings of these studies were summarized in Appendix 1 . Table  3 overviews the background of these studies. A majority of the studies were conducted in the USA ( n  = 7), followed by Taiwan ( n  = 6), Canada ( n  = 1), and England ( n  = 1). With regard to the subject domain, most of the flipped courses were related to the STEM field (Science, n  = 2; Technology, n  = 1; Engineering, n  = 1; Mathematics, n  = 6). Other subjects included social studies ( n  = 2), Chinese, ( n  = 1), English ( n  = 1) and health education ( n  = 1).

As Table  3 shows, 13 out of 15 studies were conducted in high school or secondary school, and the other two studies were conducted in elementary school. However, not all studies reported a complete profile of their student participants in terms of the age and grade level. Based on the available information, we found that the practice of flipped classrooms usually starts from grades 9 to 12 (aged 13 to 18). Five studies (i.e., Chao et al. 2015 ; Huang and Hong 2016 ; Kettle 2013 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Wang 2016 ) involved upper secondary students (Grade 10 to 12), four studies (i.e., Chen 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; Mazur et al. 2015 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ) involved ninth graders, and one study (i.e., DeSantis et al. 2015 ) involved Grade 9 to 11 students. Only Kirvan et al. ( 2015 ) implemented a flipped course for Grade 7 and 8 students. In the two studies of elementary school flipped classrooms, both studies involved upper primary students – fourth graders for Lai and Hwang ( 2016 ), and sixth graders for Tsai et al. ( 2015 ). None of the studies involved lower primary students. In terms of grade level, Grade 4 is currently the lower bound of flipped classroom research.

In following sections, we organized our findings based on our research questions (i.e., the flipped learning activities, the effects on student achievement, student attitude, and the challenges of using flipped classroom approach).

Flipped learning activities in K-12 flipped classrooms

Figure  2 presents the flipped learning activities (i.e., pre-class, in-class, and after-class) offered in the reviewed studies. In addition to watching instructional videos, we identified several types of learning activities that were commonly used in the reviewed studies. For the pre-class activities, the major activities included reading text-based materials ( n  = 3) such as textbook and notes, taking notes ( n  = 6), and doing online exercises ( n  = 4). As for the in-class activities, the main activities included brief review ( n  = 8), individual practices ( n  = 6), small-group activities ( n  = 11), and student presentation ( n  = 5). For the after-class activities, only one studies reported that students were required to do self-evaluation and reflection after finishing each unit (Lai and Hwang 2016 ). The detailed flipped learning activities of each study are summarized in Appendix 2 .

A summary of the flipped learning activities in the reviewed studies

Effects of flipped classroom approach on K-12 student achievement

To investigate student achievement in K-12 flipped classrooms, we focused specifically on comparison studies (e.g., quasi-experimental) that involved at least one group of flipped classroom and one group of traditional classroom. As shown in Table  3 , the present review included 11 comparison studies. However, two of them (i.e., Lai and Hwang 2016 ; Wang 2016 ) compared their flipped classroom with an altered format of flipped classroom rather than a traditional classroom. In the rest of the nine studies, eight studies (i.e., Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Chao et al. 2015 ; Chen 2016 ; DeSantis et al. 2015 ; Huang and Hong 2016 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Tsai et al. 2015 ) employed a quasi-experimental design to compare student achievement in flipped classroom with its traditional counterpart, and one study (i.e., Clark 2015 ) compared the flipped classroom with its traditional format in previous cohort (historical control). Five studies reported that the students in flipped classroom either performed overall significantly better than the students in traditional classroom (Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Chao et al. 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Tsai et al. 2015 ) or performed better on certain aspect (Huang and Hong 2016 ). Four studies found no significant difference in student achievement between the flipped classroom and traditional classroom (Chen 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; DeSantis et al. 2015 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ). In the present review, no study reported a detrimental or inferior effect of flipped classrooms on student achievement.

However, one should exercise caution in viewing our findings. The following three limitations in some K-12 studies could have affected their comparison of student achievement. First, not all studies utilized a pre-test or pre-treatment assessment to evaluate the initial equivalence among groups (see Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Chao et al. 2015 ; DeSantis et al. 2015 ; Huang and Hong 2016 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 for exceptions). The comparability of comparison groups thus became uncertain, which hindered further analysis (e.g., meta-analysis) on student achievement (Cheung and Slavin 2013 ).

Second, the duration of interventions was short in general, ranging from 4 weeks to 4 months. As Clark ( 2015 ) acknowledged, a novelty effect might result in a short-term boost to student performance when new technology was instituted. Meanwhile, Tsai et al. ( 2015 ) alerted that some teachers in flipped classroom might spend more time and efforts on their experimental (i.e., flipped) groups. The neutrality of data might thus be influenced.

Third, a majority of the comparison studies in the present review were conducted in the contexts of K-12 mathematics education (e.g., Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; DeSantis et al. 2015 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ). More empirical studies from other subject disciplines such as English are required to examine the general effects of K-12 flipped classrooms on student achievement (Huang and Hong 2016 ).

K-12 students’ attitude toward flipped classroom approach

To investigate K-12 students’ attitude toward flipped classroom approach, we examined students’ self-reported data (e.g., surveys, interviews), instructors’ reflections, and researchers’ observations reported in the reviewed studies. We found that students were generally satisfied with the use of flipped classroom approach (e.g., Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ; Clark 2015 ). More specifically, qualitative comments suggested the following three advantages of flipped classroom approach which contributed to a high satisfaction of the flipped courses.

First, students reported that watching the video lectures before class helped them prepare for the class activities (e.g., Chao et al. 2015 ; Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Huang and Hong 2016 ; Tsai et al 2015 ; Wang 2016 ) and that it was easier than reading text-based materials (Snyder et al. 2014 ). In particular, Schultz et al. ( 2014 ) found that “most students had a favorable perception about the flipped classroom noting the ability to pause, rewind, and review lecture” (p. 1334). These functions enabled students to take notes at their own pace (Snyder et al. 2014 ) and watch the instructional videos multiple times to gain a better understanding (Clark 2015 ).

Second, flipped classroom approach helped increase interactions with the classmates and teacher during class meetings (Chao et al. 2015 ; Chen 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ). In-class activities such as group discussion promoted students’ interactions with their peers (e.g., Clark 2015 ; Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Kettle 2013 ). In additional to the subject knowledge, students could “discuss and clarify learning goals in a collaborative manner” (Mazur et al. 2015 , p. 13). In turn, these teamwork skills might promote student performance in various contexts such as extracurricular activities (Clark 2015 ). Besides, teacher could offer timely assistance in flipped classrooms (Tsai et al. 2015 ). For example, Clark’s ( 2015 ) students reported that the teacher’s individual assistance improved their understanding on the topics. Bhagat et al. ( 2016 ) further elaborated that flipped classroom approach could help the low achievers because they were able to get more attention from teachers.

Third, there were greater opportunities for students to apply the new knowledge in solving problems (Chao et al. 2015 ; Mazur et al. 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ) and engage in the discussion of higher level problems (Tsai et al. 2015 ). Consistent with Kettle’s ( 2013 ) students’ opinion, Bhagat et al. ( 2016 ) pointed out that working through problems in class was an effective and enjoyable learning activity of flipped classroom approach. Clark’s ( 2015 ) students also showed their preference toward flipped classroom approach since it provided more chances for a variety of instructional practices (e.g., project-based learning, real-world applications) rather than merely listening to lectures.

Contrary to these positive findings, DeSantis et al. ( 2015 ) discovered that the satisfaction of their flipped classroom was significantly lower than that of their traditional classroom. They illustrated that students generally reacted negatively toward the change of instructional approach. Chen ( 2016 ) also reported that some students resisted initially because they did not get used to learning at home prior to the lesson. Consequently, some of them skipped the pre-class activities and came unprepared to the class. It thus resulted in a negative impact on the group dynamics of the in-class activities.

Challenges of using flipped classroom in K-12 education

Following Betihavas et al.’s ( 2016 ) analysis, the challenges identified in the reviewed studies were categorized into three main themes, namely student-related challenges, faculty-related challenges, and operational challenges. Each category of challenge was further coded into sub-categories.

Table  4 lists five student-related challenges in K-12 flipped classrooms. For example, some negative comments were related to video lectures: “Watching videos was considered the least effective and least enjoyable classroom activity” (Kettle 2013 , p. 594), and “the video stood out as being particularly unhelpful” (DeSantis et al. 2015 , p. 50). For the out-of-class supports, “students were not able to ask their questions immediately while watching the lesson videos” (Bhagat et al. 2016 , p. 141).

Table  5 illustrates the two faculty challenges related to teachers’ familiarity of flipped classroom approach and their preparation of flipped classroom. In fact, most of the faculty challenges were related to teachers’ preparation of flipped classroom. For example, “it is not an easy task to find videos that perfectly match what a teacher wants his or her students to learn, and it is extremely time consuming to create their own instructional videos” (Chen 2016 , p. 418) and “Each ten-minute screen-cast took hours to produce. Most of this production was done at home because long stretches of undisturbed time was needed” (Snyder et al. 2014 , p. 314).

Table  6 summarizes the four operational challenges identified in K-12 flipped classrooms. For example, several studies revealed problems about students’ IT resources: “it was found that although most participants had their own mobile devices, many did not have enough Internet access authorization at home” (Wang 2016 , p. 411), and “students being unable to load and play the videos at home if they had any kind of technological problems” (Chen 2016 , p. 418).

In the present review, we investigated the flipped learning activities, the effects, student attitude, and the main challenges of K-12 flipped classrooms. In this section, we first compare our findings in K-12 education with the findings in higher education. By synthesizing the practices reported in the reviewed studies, we propose a rudimentary model of flipped classroom approach. We then offer a set of 10 guidelines (Table  7 ) to address the possible challenges of K-12 flipped classrooms based on the voices of flipped classroom practitioners together with the relevant literature. These guidelines are grouped into three themes proposed by Betihavas et al. ( 2016 ): (1) student-related challenges; (2) faculty challenges; and (3) operational challenges.

Comparing the flipped classrooms in K-12 education and higher education

The present review overall suggests that the students in K-12 flipped classrooms would have a better achievement, or at least performed equally as in traditional classrooms. This finding was similar to the conclusion of some previous reviews of flipped classroom research in higher education (e.g., Betihavas et al. 2016 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ).

Unlike some higher education contexts such as Seery’s ( 2015 ) review study on chemistry flipped classrooms, the present review cannot draw “an overwhelming agreement that students liked the approach” (p. 762) in K-12 education. While student attitude toward flipped classroom approach was generally positive, some studies reported that a few students preferred traditional teaching approach because of the inability to ask questions during video lectures and students being accustomed to traditional instruction (Schultz et al. 2014 ). In particular, DeSantis et al. ( 2015 ) found that their students generally reacted negatively toward the change of instructional approach. Meanwhile, the instructional videos produced by their team members “did not feature the host teacher” (p. 51). Student satisfaction in their flipped classroom was thus significantly lower than that in its traditional counterpart.

As for the challenges of implementing flipped classrooms, most of the problems occurred in higher education were found also in the contexts of K-12 education. For the student-related challenges, some K-12 students were unreceptive with the structure of flipped classroom approach as in higher education (Giannakos et al. 2014 ). Also, students had a negative feeling regarding the amount of out-of-class preparation time as in nursing education (Betihavas et al. 2016 ). For the video lecture, there is a need for K-12 teachers to design carefully the instructional videos since their students may be disengaged by watching long videos (Kettle 2013 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ). Also, K-12 students might need to ask questions during video lectures (Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ). Concerning the group activities inside the classroom, K-12 students might require more guidance on group process in order to work as productive as university students (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ). In the present review, no studies reported a decrease of attendance, as stated in Giannakos et al.’s ( 2014 ) review, after using flipping a course. However, the regular attendance may be due to the strict regulation of K-12 schools rather than the use of flipped classroom approach.

Faculty challenges in K-12 flipped classrooms were similar to higher education. First, flipped classroom approach requires a high initial cost particularly regarding the production of instructional videos (Betihavas et al. 2016 ; Giannakos et al. 2014 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ). Second, teachers should be sufficiently trained in using flipped classroom approach in order to put this approach into full use (Zuber 2016 ).

When compared with higher education, more operational challenges were identified in the contexts of K-12 education. Similar to the rural and remote university students (Betihavas et al. 2016 ), a few students in K-12 flipped classrooms also suffered from limited Internet access. Meanwhile, K-12 teachers may have difficulties in monitoring student learning outside the classroom. They may also encounter technical problems and require supports from schools when operating their flipped course.

A rudimentary model of flipped classroom approach

Based on the practices reported in the reviewed studies, we propose a rudimentary model of flipped classroom approach (Fig.  3 ). In order to be practical in most of the K-12 education contexts, we assume the following: (1) only basic IT resources (e.g., video production, Internet access) are available. Therefore, the flipped classroom model would not draw upon any special functions of some self-developed systems (e.g., Lai and Hwang 2016 ); (2) the flipped course is taught by only one teacher. Therefore, team teaching practices (e.g., Kirvan et al. 2015 ) would not be considered.

A proposed model of flipped classroom approach

The central teaching strategy in the out-of-class learning component is direct instruction (Bishop and Verleger 2013 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ) focusing on the knowledge levels of remembering and understanding (Lai and Hwang 2016 ). Students learn the course materials by watching instructional videos. Teachers can provide content notes to guide students’ note-taking (DeSantis et al. 2015 ) and ensure students have adequately prepared for class meetings (Clark 2015 ). Toward the end of out-of-class learning, teachers can provide online exercises for learning evaluation (Wang 2016 ). By checking students’ online learning performance, teachers can “conduct some discussion based on any misunderstandings or high-error-rate questions in class” (Lai and Hwang 2016 , p. 129–130). To support students’ out-of-class learning, teachers can provide students with communication platform for asking questions (guideline 5).

As for the in-class learning component, teachers can first have a brief review on video lecture to recall students’ memory and clarify any misunderstanding (e.g., DeSantis et al. 2015 ; Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Lai and Hwang 2016 ). Then, most of the time can be spent on group learning activities (Bishop and Verleger 2013 ) focusing on applying the knowledge learned from video lectures (Lai and Hwang 2016 ) and solving advanced problems (Chao et al. 2015 ; Clark 2015 ) under the supports of teacher and peers. For example, group discussion (Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Lai and Hwang 2016 ) and collaborative tasks (Clarks 2015 ) can be used inside the classroom. Nevertheless, teachers can still offer hands-on exercises for students’ individual practices (Clark 2015 ) since solving problem independently is also important for their learning. In some occasions, teachers can consider delivering short lecture to introduce course contents (Tsai et al. 2015 ) and extend students’ knowledge (Lai and Hwang 2016 ). For example, Schultz et al.’s ( 2014 ) students suggested “difficult concepts be presented in class and not through video” (p. 1339). Perhaps, it is suitable for teachers to explain complicated concepts inside the classroom. In this way, teachers can have immediate understanding on how students grasp the knowledge by observing their facial cues, and further elaborate the difficult parts according to students’ enquiries. Finally, teachers can conclude the class (Huang and Hong 2016 ) or ask students to gather in groups and review what they have learned (DeSantis et al. 2015 ). Teachers may also have a brief preview on the out-of-class learning items for the next lesson (Huang and Hong 2016 ) to promote student interest.

Nevertheless, we suggest incorporating the flipped classroom model with the following guidelines to prevent some potential challenges. For example, we propose using 6-min videos (guideline 3) and limiting the pre-class activities of each lesson within 20 min (guideline 4). These strategies can avoid students’ disengagement from video lecture and overloading students in class preparation.

Addressing student-related challenges

Guideline 1: opening up teacher-student communication before flipping.

Unlike traditional classroom, flipped classroom approach requires students to explore course content before class. Students thus have more autonomy to schedule their learning and more in-class time for peer interactions together with the teacher’s assistance. However, some students did not understand the rationale of re-ordering the teaching and learning activities (Snyder et al. 2014 ; Wang 2016 ). Also, some students were not familiar with the arrangement of a flipped course, which may affect the efficacy of this instructional approach (Clark 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ).

At the beginning of implementation, teacher-student communication is necessary to promote students’ acceptance of this instructional approach. On one hand, teachers should detail the goal of flipped classroom approach as well as its routines and procedures (Clark 2015 ; Mazur et al. 2015 ). For example, Mazur et al. ( 2015 ) would provide a detailed overview of course requirements together with an explanation of the steps involved. On the other hand, students should have a chance to express their concerns about the flipped course. In this way, teachers can address students’ worries and provide any necessary help or guidance.

Guideline 2: Demonstrating students how to learn through flipped classroom

Clark ( 2015 ) reported that it was demanding and challenging for students to pick up a new learning approach and understand course content at the same time. As Grypp and Luebeck ( 2015 ) observed in their high school calculus course, “even these academically advanced students needed further instruction on how to work together productively and maximize the benefits of this new learning model” (p. 192). Therefore, it is necessary to first demonstrate how flipped classroom approach works to students.

In Kirvan et al.’s ( 2015 ) practice, they would prepare their students gradually before full implementation of their flipped classroom. Students were asked to view a video lecture during class time. At the same time, they introduced students with some cognitive skills such as making their own notes while watching the video lectures. Providing instructor brief notes to accompany the videos is another useful technique to guide student learning during video lectures (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ). For the in-class activities, students may not be accustomed to the change especially regarding the group learning process (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ). Teachers should provide clear instructions to ensure better communication and efficiency in group activities. For example, Clark ( 2015 ) would divide his students into three groups according to their ability. Each group of students had a clear lesson objective and completed their corresponding learning tasks. The high ability students worked on practice problems in groups without the teacher’s assistance, whereas the average students first reviewed the contents with the teacher before doing in-class exercises. As for the underperforming students, they would revisit the instructional videos in groups and gain a better understanding of the materials. In this example, every student in Clark’s ( 2015 ) flipped classroom knew their own learning objective and what to be discussed with their group members.

Guideline 3: using cognitive theory of multimedia learning to guide video production

Some students were disengaged when watching long instructional videos (Kettle 2013 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ). Concerning the video presentation, a few students complained to Snyder et al. ( 2014 ) that “I feel like I’m just reading and listening to facts, rather than you talking to us in person” (p. 314). In this regard, Mayer’s ( 2014 ) cognitive theory of multimedia learning can inform the design of instructional videos in flipped classrooms.

Mayer’s ( 2014 ) proposed 12 design principles to enhance the multimedia instructions. For example, segmenting principle stresses that a long presentation should be divided into a series of short videos. Specifically, empirical findings suggested that students’ median engagement time of watching instructional videos was 6 min (Guo et al. 2014 ). Thus, the desirable length of each video should be within 6 min. Also, personalization principle suggests that the presentation in videos should be spoken in a conversational style. Teachers should use an informal conversation with students (e.g., “I” and “you”), instead of a non-personalized style speaking in a third-person formal monologue. In addition, signaling principle states that learning is enhanced when essential materials are highlighted. Teachers may consider using PowerPoint-embedded presentation such as screencasts (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ). It can offer a step-by-step instruction to guide students’ video watching (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ) and assist students in note-taking (Snyder et al. 2014 ).

Guideline 4: retaining the workload when flipping a course

Echoing the findings of previous reviews in higher education (e.g., Betihavas et al. 2016 ; O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015 ), some K-12 students were upset that the pre-class workload of flipped classrooms overwhelmed their time at home (Schultz et al. 2014 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ; Wang 2016 ). Teachers should retain, as in its traditional format, the workload of their flipped course.

We encourage teachers to estimate the time required for the homework that traditionally done outside the classroom. Teachers can use this time requirement as a reference when designing their out-of-class learning activities of flipped classrooms. In addition, empirical studies in higher education suggested that the total time of all video segments for each lecture should be confined to about 20 min (McGivney-Burelle and Xue 2013 ; Vazquez and Chiang 2015 ). In this way, teachers can ensure that students would not be frustrated because of the extra workload.

Guideline 5: providing students with communication platform outside the classroom

Some students lamented that they could not ask questions during pre-class activities (Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Schultz et al. 2014 ). Different from traditional classroom, students in a flipped classroom environment cannot interrupt their teacher for enquiries or seek for further elaboration while watching instructional videos. To overcome this problem, teachers can create an online discussion forum for students to post their questions and discuss with peers (Bhagat et al. 2016 ). The learning community can thus be extended outside the classroom.

Addressing faculty challenges

Guideline 6: enriching teachers’ knowledge of flipped classroom approach.

Among the reviewed studies, some teachers recalled their experiences as a first-time user of flipped classroom approach (e.g., Chen 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Kettle 2013 ). At the initial stage, teachers may neither understand the value of flipped classroom approach nor accustom to this new instructional approach. As Grypp and Luebeck ( 2015 ) suggested, teachers “must first embrace the inherent value of this new structure and explore new uses of class time” (p. 192).

Institutes can create opportunities for teachers to share their experiences of implementing flipped classrooms as well as to receive feedback from colleagues or other professionals (Mazur et al. 2015 ). In Kirvan et al.’s ( 2015 ) study, a student teacher joined the teaching team of their flipped classroom. By enacting the flipped course, the student teacher gained experiences in both video production and lesson design. Kirvan et al. ( 2015 ) concluded that their intervention could be a critical component of teacher preparation and “may be important for making education theory come alive for new teachers” (p. 219). Therefore, institutes may consider strengthening their teacher training and professional development on flipped classroom approach.

Guideline 7: preparing flipped learning materials progressively

In some K-12 flipped courses, preparing flipped learning materials required considerable start-up effort (Chen 2016 ; Kettle 2013 ; Kirvan et al. 2015 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ). Chen ( 2016 ) explained that although there were instructional videos such as Kahn Academy available online, “not all of the topics taught in high school had all of the video resources for flipped classroom” (p. 417). It was also “not an easy task to find videos that perfectly match what a teacher wants his or her students to learn” (p. 418). Consequently, a substantial amount of teacher time was required to create their own materials.

Before flipping the entire course, teachers can start small and proceed at a reasonable pace (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ). Experiment in small ways also enables teachers to gain experiences of using flipped classroom approach (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ). Teachers can cumulate the flipped learning materials by working on two to three topics every year. Grypp and Luebeck ( 2015 ) further recommended teachers flipping their courses in team. In other words, teachers can share their experiences of implementing flipped classrooms as well as their teaching resources. However, in DeSantis et al.’s ( 2015 ) experience, the materials created by others may not feature the host teacher. Discussion and agreement on the materials designed are thus necessary if teachers intend to develop a flipped course collaboratively.

Addressing operational challenges

Guideline 8: supporting the students who are limited by technology resources.

As some reviewed studies revealed, not all K-12 students have Internet access to view the pre-class videos at home (Chen 2016 ; Clark 2015 ; Kettle 2013 ; Snyder et al. 2014 ; Wang 2016 ). Wang ( 2016 ) cautioned that “learners with less family support may lose the chance of learning” (p. 412) in flipped classrooms. Teachers should consider students’ socio-economic status and make IT supports available for students. For example, teachers can extend the use of computer facilities in school to support the implementation of flipped classrooms (Schultz et al. 2014 ). Also, teachers can prepare a few additional copies of flipped learning materials in flash drives or DVDs for the students who do not have Internet connection at home (Clark 2015; Schultz et al. 2014 ).

Guideline 9: using LMS with gamification to monitor and motivate student learning

Chao et al. ( 2015 ) pointed out that “it is difficult to ensure that students had truly previewed the video” (p. 524). In this regard, they designed follow-up quizzes on instructional videos to ensure students had previewed the learning materials. A learning management system (LMS) is therefore required to monitor and record the data of student learning. However, there is still a possibility that students complete the quizzes casually without being well prepared from video lectures. So how can we engage students in learning tasks?

Outside the contexts of flipped classroom approach, gamification is recently used in the education field to engage student in learning (Hamari et al. 2014 ). Hew et al. ( 2016 ) found that digital game elements such as points, badges, and leaderboard could produce a positive effect on student motivation and engagement. In a gamified environment, they found that students would be more active online (e.g., contribute more on discussion forum) and engage in more difficult tasks. Some LMSs such as Moodle enable the use of game elements. To motivate student learning, teachers may consider flipping and gamifying their course by using these systems.

Guideline 10: providing institutional supports of operating flipped classrooms

Flipped classroom approach relies on the extent of support and investment by schools in IT resources (Huang and Hong 2016 ; Wang 2016 ). For example, Chen ( 2016 ) alerted that teachers may encounter problems on video production or “run into issues with being unable to upload the videos” (p. 418). Thus, the support from IT staff is essential when implementing a flipped course.

Institutes may consider allocating additional manpower to support the implementation of flipped classrooms. In this way, teachers can develop their flipped learning materials collaboratively (Grypp and Luebeck 2015 ) and administer the flipped course in team (Kirvan et al. 2015 ; Mazur et al. 2015 ). For example, Kirvan et al. ( 2015 ) split their students into two groups (re-teaching group and exploration group) by referring to their daily assessment results. One teacher provided remedial help for students who need further understanding of the materials (re-teaching group), while another teacher helped more capable students explore the materials more deeply (exploration group). Once the re-teaching group was ready to proceed, they would join the exploration group to engage in the advanced learning activities.

Conclusions

This article reviewed the empirical studies of flipped classroom approach in K-12 education. We provided an overview of their flipped learning activities, the findings about the effects of flipped courses on achievement, student attitude toward flipped classroom approach, and the challenges associated with its implementation. Although the flipped classroom approach is not a panacea for all education ills, it seems to promote active learning which requires students to solve problems using what they had learned before class. In the present review, there is no evidence that flipped classroom approach negatively impact student learning in K-12 education. At best, this instructional approach can help students perform significantly overall better than students in traditional classrooms.

Findings regarding student attitude toward flipped classroom approach are mixed. The negative feedback from students highlights the importance of improving this instructional approach. The challenges of using flipped classrooms were categorized into three main themes, namely student-related challenges, faculty challenges, and operational challenges. Based on the empirical findings and relevant literature, a flipped classroom model and a set of 10 guidelines were formulated to address these potential challenges.

However, the findings of the present review were limited to 15 studies of K-12 flipped classrooms. While the number of flipped classroom studies has been increasing (Giannakos et al. 2014 ), it appears that the research in K-12 education occupies only a small portion of the body of literature. In particular, only two studies of elementary school flipped classrooms (i.e., Lai and Hwang 2016 ; Tsai et al. 2015 ) were found in our search. Moreover, we cannot identify any challenges reported in these two studies. More empirical studies are recommended to investigate the effects and challenges of K-12 flipped classrooms, especially in the contexts of elementary school.

The future research should address the major limitations of some previous studies. For example, researchers should utilize a pre-test in their comparison study to evaluate the initial equivalence among groups, instead of merely assuming that the different groups are similar in terms of student prior knowledge. Also, future studies should investigate consecutive uses of flipped classroom approach with a longer time frame (Bhagat et al. 2016 ; Clark 2015 ).

One possible research method to examine and evaluate the use of flipped classroom approach over a longer time frame (e.g., 1 year or more) is design-based research (Anderson and Shattuck 2012 ; Mazur et al. 2015 ). Design-based research allows a researcher to iteratively adjust and improve a flipped course. This could potentially yield a more in-depth understanding of the effects of the instructional approach on student achievement and attitude as compared to a one-off experiment or quasi-experiment design. Conducting a design-based research over a longer of time could also yield more rigorous practical guidelines for using flipped classroom approach in K-12 settings. In addition to the STEM field, directions for future studies can focus on other subject domains of K-12 education such as language learning (Huang and Hong 2016 ).

Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research and Development, 34 (1), 1–14.

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: a decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41 (1), 16–25.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2009). Remixing chemistry class: two Colorado teachers make vodcasts of their lectures to free up class time for hands-on activities. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36 (4), 22–27.

Google Scholar  

Bernard, J. S. (2015). The flipped classroom: fertile ground for nursing education research. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 12 (1), 99–109.

Betihavas, V., Bridgman, H., Kornhaber, R., & Cross, M. (2016). The evidence for ‘flipping out’: a systematic review of the flipped classroom in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 38 , 15–21.

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.

Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. In 120th ASEE National Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA (Paper ID 6219) . Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education.

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.

Chen, L. L. (2016). Impacts of flipped classroom in high school health education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44 (4), 411–420.

Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9 , 88–113.

Chua, J. S. M., & Lateef, F. A. (2014). The flipped classroom: viewpoints in Asian universities. Education in Medicine Journal, 6 (4), 20–26.

Clark, K. R. (2015). The effects of the flipped model of instruction on student engagement and performance in the secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educators Online, 12 (1), 91–115.

de Bono, E. (2000). Six thinking hats . London: Penguin.

DeLozier, S.J., & Rhodes, M.G. (2016). Flipped classrooms: a review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational Psychology Review , 1-11. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-015-9356-9 .

DeSantis, J., Van Curen, R., Putsch, J., & Metzger, J. (2015). Do students learn more from a flip? An exploration of the efficacy of flipped and traditional lessons. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26 (1), 39–63.

Engin, M. (2014). Extending the flipped classroom model: developing second language writing skills through student-created digital videos. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14 (5), 12–26.

Giannakos, M. N., Krogstie, J., & Chrisochoides, N. (2014). Reviewing the flipped classroom research: reflections for computer science education. In Proceedings of the Computer Science Education Research Conference (pp. 23–29). New York, NY: ACM.

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.

Gross, B., Marinari, M., Hoffman, M., DeSimone, K., & Burke, P. (2015). Flipped @ SBU: student satisfaction and the college classroom. Educational Research Quarterly, 39 (2), 36–52.

Grypp, L., & Luebeck, J. (2015). Rotating solids and flipping instruction. Mathematics Teacher, 109 (3), 186–193.

Gundlach, E., Richards, K. A. R., Nelson, D., & Levesque-Bristol, C. (2015). A comparison of student attitudes, statistical reasoning, performance, and perceptions for web-augmented traditional, fully online, and flipped sections of a statistical literacy class. Journal of Statistics Education, 23 (1), 1–33.

Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale Conference (pp. 41–50). New York, NY: ACM.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025-3034). IEEE.

Hew, K. F., Huang, B., Chu, K. W. S., & Chiu, D. K. (2016). Engaging Asian students through game mechanics: findings from two experiment studies. Computers & Education, 92 , 221–236.

Horn, M. B. (2013). The transformational potential of flipped classrooms. Education Next, 13 (3), 78–79.

Huang, Y. N., & Hong, Z. R. (2016). The effects of a flipped English classroom intervention on students’ information and communication technology and English reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64 (2), 175–193.

Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. D. M. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 14 (1), article 5.

Kettle, M. (2013). Flipped physics. Physics Education, 48 (5), 593–596.

Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. Internet & Higher Education, 22 , 37–50.

Kirvan, R., Rakes, C. R., & Zamora, R. (2015). Flipping an algebra classroom: analyzing, modeling, and solving systems of linear equations. Computers in the Schools, 32 (3-4), 201–223.

Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: an experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78 , 160–173.

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.

Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students’ learning performance in a mathematics course. Computers & Education, 100 , 126–140.

Mayer, R. E. (2014). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Mazur, A. D., Brown, B., & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Learning designs using flipped classroom instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 41 (2), 1–26.

McGivney-Burelle, J., & Xue, F. (2013). Flipping calculus. PRIMUS, 23 (5), 477–486.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Reprint-preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Physical Therapy, 89 (9), 873–880.

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.

Presti, C. R. (2016). The flipped learning approach in nursing education: a literature review. Journal of Nursing Education, 55 (5), 252–257.

Schultz, D., Duffield, S., Rasmussen, S. C., & Wageman, J. (2014). Effects of the flipped classroom model on student performance for advanced placement high school chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, 91 (9), 1334–1339.

Seery, M. K. (2015). Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16 (4), 758–768.

Snyder, C., Paska, L. M., & Besozzi, D. (2014). Cast from the past: using screencasting in the social studies classroom. The Social Studies, 105 (6), 310–314.

Tsai, C. W., Shen, P. D., & Lu, Y. J. (2015). The effects of problem-based learning with flipped classroom on elementary students’ computing skills: a case study of the production of ebooks. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 11 (2), 32–40.

Vazquez, J. J., & Chiang, E. P. (2015). Flipping out! A case study on how to flip the principles of economics classroom. International Advances in Economic Research, 21 , 379–390.

Wang, Y. H. (2016). Could a mobile-assisted learning system support flipped classrooms for classical Chinese learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32 , 391–415.

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.

Zuber, W. J. (2016). The flipped classroom, a review of the literature. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48 (2), 97–103.

Download references

Authors’ contributions

CKL executed the review study under the supervision of KFH. All authors contributed to the extraction and categorization of data. CKL drafted the manuscript and KFH critically revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong

Chung Kwan Lo & Khe Foon Hew

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chung Kwan Lo .

Table 8 shows the major findings of the reviewed K-12 flipped classroom studies.

Table 9 illustrates the flipped learning activities in the reviewed K-12 flipped classroom studies.

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.

Lo, C.K., Hew, K.F. A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: possible solutions and recommendations for future research. RPTEL 12 , 4 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-016-0044-2

Download citation

Received : 03 October 2016

Accepted : 19 December 2016

Published : 07 January 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-016-0044-2

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

• Student Achievement
• Student Engagement
• Student Attitude
• Instructional Approach
• Operational Challenge

Recent Posts

Teaching the economics of monetary policy rules | bring fred into the classroom | april 2024.

• FRED & DDP Partnership
• Teaching About the Economics of Saving | Bring FRED into the Classroom | March 2024
• Teaching About the Economics of Banking | Bring FRED into the Classroom | February 2024
• New Related Content on FRED

Focus on the Taylor Rule

This handout provides instructions on building the graph below and includes writing prompts for out-of-class assignments.

From the FRED Blog

The post “ The Taylor Rule ” discusses how the output gap and current inflation can guide monetary policymaking.

From the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

The essay “ Policy Rules and How Policymakers Use Them ” discusses several monetary policy rules that have received attention in the academic research literature.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE RESEARCH DIVISION NEWSLETTER

Research division.

• Legal and Privacy

One Federal Reserve Bank Plaza St. Louis, MO 63102

Information for Visitors