LITERATURE REVIEW
Exploring the Flipped Learning Model in a Seventh Grade Science Class
A Review of the Literature
A Review of the Literature
Many school districts in the United States are investing in computers with internet access. A report published by the National Center for Education Statistics in 2012 shows the ratio of students to instructional computers with internet access rising from 6.6 in 2000, 3.8 in 2005 to 3.1 in 2008. The flow of technology into the classroom has created an opportunity for teachers who see the potential to engage and motivate students using computers and multimedia elements. (Bathker, 2013; Alexander, 1995).
One of the ways technology has become an integral part of learning is through the use of blended learning model of instruction. Blended classrooms leverage web-based interaction with in-class interaction (Klenner-Moore, J. 2011). The following literature review will discuss a form of blended classroom, the flipped classroom model, it’s benefits and challenges.
What is the Flipped Classroom Model?
The flipped classroom model was first described by Baker in 2000 when he provided his university students with lecture notes online in order to provide more time for group work and practice problem sets in class. In 2007 Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams, high school chemistry teachers in Colorado, decided to create video recordings of their lectures for students who missed classes due to sports and activities. Students who missed classes viewed the video taped lectures. What Bergman and Sams did not expect was that students who attended the class lectures also began watching the videos. Bergman and Sams then pre-recorded all their lectures for the next school year, opening up their actual class time for labs and problem work time. (Bergman & Sams, 2012).
Because the traditional pattern of instruction is shifted to assigned homework, it is referred to as inverted classroom (Lage., et al., 2000) or the classroom flip (Baker, 2000) where teacher-created videos and interactive lessons are accessed at home before class (Tucker, 2012). Homework and exercises are done in class with the teacher available to provide guidance as needed. This flipped model opens up class time for student inquiry facilitated by web access (Bathker, 2013) and provides greater opportunities for active learning (Mason, Shuman and Cook, 2013; Kawecki, cited by Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013) maximizing class time for collaboration on projects, engaging deeper into content, practicing skills and receiving progress feedback (Hamdan, McKnight, McKnight, Arfstrom, 2013).
By nature of the flipped model, there is a shift of instruction from teacher to student-centered making the central figure, the professor, the “sage on the stage” into the “guide on the side” (King, 2013) thus enabling deeper learning (Bergann & Sams, 2012). A learner-centered educator could then provide for action-based, authentic, connected, collaborative, innovative, high level, engaging, experience base, project based, inquiry based and self actualizing activities (Gorman, 2012). The possibility of meeting student’s individual needs at their level in this student-centered classroom setting increases. Afterall, flipping is not just about showing the videos alone (Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013; Bermann & Sams, 2012). The question really is what do you do with the free time you now have to enhance student learning (Mazur, 2013).
Active Learning in a Flipped Classroom Model
The flipped classroom model has been shown to free actual class time for learner-centered activities (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013; Bergmann & Sams, 2012), improving the use of class time to engage students in various instructional strategies like hands-on and project-based learning activities (Clark 2013) and collaborative learning projects (Johnson & Renner, 2012).
Active learning leads to better student performance. Eric Mazur of Harvard University has been using a method he calls peer instruction since 1991 (Crouch & Mazur, 2000). Peer instruction is an in-classroom activity that engages students to discuss with another, with a different point of view, their answers to specific questions posed by the instructor. Students are expected to come to class prepared, having been provided reading resources prior to class. In a study over 10 years using peer instruction, Crouch & Mazur (2000) found dramatic improvement in test scores independent of instructor. In a worldwide survey on peer instruction, Fagan, Crouch and Mazur (2002) also found “learning gains above the level for traditional pedagogies and consistent with interactive pedagogies.”
Constructivism and Active Learning
Flipped learning model can be one way to create a classroom that is learner-centered (Flipped Learning Network). At the core of student-centered classroom is the theory of constructivism (Clark 2013), a learning theory that says we acquire new knowledge by interacting with content and creating new meaning from that interaction. Constructivism puts students at the center of the learning process, actively participating in thinking and discussing ideas while making meaning for themselves (King, 2013). Learners can only make sense of new situations in the light of their existing understanding. Learning involves an active process in which learners construct meaning by connecting new ideas with their existing knowledge (Naylor & Keogh, 1999). Simply put, learning is an active process done by the learner.
In addition, Vygotsky introduced a continual interplay between the learner and others in his theory of the zone of proximal development, emphasizing the social context of learning. The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the learning potential space where a teacher can provide a series of steps (or scaffolding) that would eventually lead to growth. Constructivist practices also require more work from teachers (Clark 2013) for an effective classroom flip requires careful preparation, recording lectures, integration of out-of-class and in-class activities, learning new skills (Educause, 2012).
Because the flipped classroom model is a relatively new concept, limited research is available, particularly involving middle school-aged students although much of the research conducted at the university level have reported positive results. The flipped classroom model is a successful way of freeing up class time (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013; Bergmann & Sams, 2012) and provides for more active and student-centered classrooms (Pierce & Fox, 2012). Instructors were able to cover more material compared to the traditional way without requiring more time outside of class (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013). Increased student engagement (Clark, 2013; Strayer, 2012; Enfield 2013; Lage, Platt and Treglia, 2000; Kawecki, as cited by Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013) ) and improved student performance (Missildine, Fountain & Summers, 2013) were found to be positive effects of the flipped model.
Cognitive Strain of Flipping
The cognitive strain that flipping imposes accounts for much of it success -- and the resistance it generates (Berett, 2012). In a study conducted by Clark (2013) involving 42 high school math students enrolled in Algebra 1 over 7 weeks, students voiced concerns over flipping difficult content at the same time introducing this new model of instruction. Many students commented on the challenge of simultaneously having to learn a new instructional approach and extremely difficult content. Further, they expressed that their performance could have improved more if the flipped model of teaching was used with easier content (Clark, 2013). Strayer (2007), who studied 50 students of statistics in a university setting recommended that inverted classroom “not be the preferred design for an introductory course.” He argued that students in more advanced classes may be more willing to persist and make other learning connections. In another study by Missildine, Fountain, Summers and Gosselin (2013) of 589 nursing students, the flipped classroom was reported to require more work by the students, with the same students who showed improved learning not reporting improved satisfaction. Findings were found by Lage, Platt, & Treglia (2000) who found economics students to regard the flipped classroom as a harder class. However, not all studies showed that the flipped classroom was perceived to be harder. Pierce & Fox (2012), who flipped a renal pharmacotherapy module, did not find the same perceptions from their sample group of 71 university students. Enfield (2013) found his students describing the flipped experience as “appropriately challenging.”
The variety of unexpected activities in a flipped classroom could leave the students feeling unsettled, although students adapted and came to see the value of the cooperative approach (Strayer, 2012). Strayer (2012) further recommends providing for appropriate online communications tool to create a place for reflection and increase interaction. Some other recommendations to ease this strain have been offered. An “all or nothing” approach does not have to be employed in implementing a flipped class (Johnson & Renner, 2012). Flipping individual units or lessons is another way to flip. Strayer (2012) warns that this model may not be the preferred for an introductory course.
Students are used to receiving information via the transmittal model that assumes the brain is like an empty bucket with professors pouring knowledge in (King, 2013). With the flipped classroom, students actively participate in their learning, (King, 2013), and thus require more effort. Change requires adaptation.
Student Engagement
The limited research available seems to point towards increased student engagement. Clark (2013), in his study involving 42 ninth grade Algebra 1 students found that students were more engaged and more involved compared to those in the traditional classroom. On the other hand, Bathker (2013), on his action research study involving 18 high school physics students did not show student reported increase in motivation and engagement. In the university level, Enfield (2013) in his study of 50 multimedia students found that most considered the flipped approach as engaging.
Student Behavioral Engagement and Academic Performance
Student engagement goes hand in hand with academic performance. The relationship between student behavioral engagement and academic performance was investigated by Jung-Sook Lee in a sample of 3,268 fifteen-year-old students from 121 US schools. Her study showed evidence of the effects of student engagement on academic performance. Behavioral engagement, defined as effort and perseverance in learning, was found to be prerequisite, especially when learning difficult material.
Engagement is multi-faceted. Literature defines three types of engagement: Behavioral (participation), Emotional and Cognitive Engagement (Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004). As such, measuring engagement can be a complex process. Simpler tools, such as the Research Assessment Package to Schools (RAPS) developed by the Institute for Research and Reform in Education are available.
Videos
Pre-existing videos were used in a few studies. Moroney (2013), who used Khan Academy videos in one study involving 37 algebra college students, wrote that there is a distinct advantage to putting one’s own mark on the instruction by creating your own material. He also added that self-made videos would reduce the level of inconsistency in the student who is trying to absorb different pieces of instruction. …. agree stating self-prepared instruction gives teachers another chance to review the material. Videos don’t have to be production quality (Bergmann, 2013; Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013). However, sometimes, the best option as a beginner may be to use existing videos (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). It is also important that the videos integrate well with the in-class activities (Strayer, 2012; Educause, 2012).
Videos for flipping are not limited to teachers talking to a camera. Several screencasting software programs are now available to capture anything on your screen, voice, a webcam and a digital pens. (Bergmann and Sams, 2012). There were no studies comparing the tools available as it relates to student engagement.
Flipping requires learning how to create screencasts or videos. Also necessary is the skill explaining concepts in clear, concise and bite-sized chunks (Tucker, 2012).
Concerns About Flipped Learning
Concerns about too much emphasis on lectures and homework have been raised (Stager, 2013; Nielsen, 2011) and that the need to flip is merely symptomatic of a bloated curriculum (Stager, 2013). Stager predicts most teachers will eliminated and mediocre ones be hired to create video lectures not customised to the specific needs of the class. Sams (2013) shares Stager’s concern re generic videos substituting teachers. Educause warns that the flipped classroom is an easy model to get wrong. “An effective flip requires careful preparation: recording lectures and preparing out-of-class and in-class activities that must be integrated.”
Conclusion
What I have learned about this endeavor from these resources include: that the flipped learning classroom model poses a huge potential for freeing up in-class time so teachers are free to engage their students with active learning activities. It’s not just about creating the direct instructional materials (video) and sending it as homework, but more importantly, it’s about making the best use of the face-to-face opportunities in class. The flipped classroom model benefits the students by helping them become active learners, more collaborative and innovative, including an increased opportunity for 1:1 teacher & student interaction. Concerns about the flipped classroom model include an increased cognitive load when flipping is introduced for the first time with a challenging topic, the need for teachers to learn to use new technologies for screencasts/videos, and students not doing “homework.” Limited studies are available at this time.
One of the ways technology has become an integral part of learning is through the use of blended learning model of instruction. Blended classrooms leverage web-based interaction with in-class interaction (Klenner-Moore, J. 2011). The following literature review will discuss a form of blended classroom, the flipped classroom model, it’s benefits and challenges.
What is the Flipped Classroom Model?
The flipped classroom model was first described by Baker in 2000 when he provided his university students with lecture notes online in order to provide more time for group work and practice problem sets in class. In 2007 Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams, high school chemistry teachers in Colorado, decided to create video recordings of their lectures for students who missed classes due to sports and activities. Students who missed classes viewed the video taped lectures. What Bergman and Sams did not expect was that students who attended the class lectures also began watching the videos. Bergman and Sams then pre-recorded all their lectures for the next school year, opening up their actual class time for labs and problem work time. (Bergman & Sams, 2012).
Because the traditional pattern of instruction is shifted to assigned homework, it is referred to as inverted classroom (Lage., et al., 2000) or the classroom flip (Baker, 2000) where teacher-created videos and interactive lessons are accessed at home before class (Tucker, 2012). Homework and exercises are done in class with the teacher available to provide guidance as needed. This flipped model opens up class time for student inquiry facilitated by web access (Bathker, 2013) and provides greater opportunities for active learning (Mason, Shuman and Cook, 2013; Kawecki, cited by Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013) maximizing class time for collaboration on projects, engaging deeper into content, practicing skills and receiving progress feedback (Hamdan, McKnight, McKnight, Arfstrom, 2013).
By nature of the flipped model, there is a shift of instruction from teacher to student-centered making the central figure, the professor, the “sage on the stage” into the “guide on the side” (King, 2013) thus enabling deeper learning (Bergann & Sams, 2012). A learner-centered educator could then provide for action-based, authentic, connected, collaborative, innovative, high level, engaging, experience base, project based, inquiry based and self actualizing activities (Gorman, 2012). The possibility of meeting student’s individual needs at their level in this student-centered classroom setting increases. Afterall, flipping is not just about showing the videos alone (Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013; Bermann & Sams, 2012). The question really is what do you do with the free time you now have to enhance student learning (Mazur, 2013).
Active Learning in a Flipped Classroom Model
The flipped classroom model has been shown to free actual class time for learner-centered activities (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013; Bergmann & Sams, 2012), improving the use of class time to engage students in various instructional strategies like hands-on and project-based learning activities (Clark 2013) and collaborative learning projects (Johnson & Renner, 2012).
Active learning leads to better student performance. Eric Mazur of Harvard University has been using a method he calls peer instruction since 1991 (Crouch & Mazur, 2000). Peer instruction is an in-classroom activity that engages students to discuss with another, with a different point of view, their answers to specific questions posed by the instructor. Students are expected to come to class prepared, having been provided reading resources prior to class. In a study over 10 years using peer instruction, Crouch & Mazur (2000) found dramatic improvement in test scores independent of instructor. In a worldwide survey on peer instruction, Fagan, Crouch and Mazur (2002) also found “learning gains above the level for traditional pedagogies and consistent with interactive pedagogies.”
Constructivism and Active Learning
Flipped learning model can be one way to create a classroom that is learner-centered (Flipped Learning Network). At the core of student-centered classroom is the theory of constructivism (Clark 2013), a learning theory that says we acquire new knowledge by interacting with content and creating new meaning from that interaction. Constructivism puts students at the center of the learning process, actively participating in thinking and discussing ideas while making meaning for themselves (King, 2013). Learners can only make sense of new situations in the light of their existing understanding. Learning involves an active process in which learners construct meaning by connecting new ideas with their existing knowledge (Naylor & Keogh, 1999). Simply put, learning is an active process done by the learner.
In addition, Vygotsky introduced a continual interplay between the learner and others in his theory of the zone of proximal development, emphasizing the social context of learning. The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the learning potential space where a teacher can provide a series of steps (or scaffolding) that would eventually lead to growth. Constructivist practices also require more work from teachers (Clark 2013) for an effective classroom flip requires careful preparation, recording lectures, integration of out-of-class and in-class activities, learning new skills (Educause, 2012).
Because the flipped classroom model is a relatively new concept, limited research is available, particularly involving middle school-aged students although much of the research conducted at the university level have reported positive results. The flipped classroom model is a successful way of freeing up class time (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013; Bergmann & Sams, 2012) and provides for more active and student-centered classrooms (Pierce & Fox, 2012). Instructors were able to cover more material compared to the traditional way without requiring more time outside of class (Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013). Increased student engagement (Clark, 2013; Strayer, 2012; Enfield 2013; Lage, Platt and Treglia, 2000; Kawecki, as cited by Brunsell & Horejsi, 2013) ) and improved student performance (Missildine, Fountain & Summers, 2013) were found to be positive effects of the flipped model.
Cognitive Strain of Flipping
The cognitive strain that flipping imposes accounts for much of it success -- and the resistance it generates (Berett, 2012). In a study conducted by Clark (2013) involving 42 high school math students enrolled in Algebra 1 over 7 weeks, students voiced concerns over flipping difficult content at the same time introducing this new model of instruction. Many students commented on the challenge of simultaneously having to learn a new instructional approach and extremely difficult content. Further, they expressed that their performance could have improved more if the flipped model of teaching was used with easier content (Clark, 2013). Strayer (2007), who studied 50 students of statistics in a university setting recommended that inverted classroom “not be the preferred design for an introductory course.” He argued that students in more advanced classes may be more willing to persist and make other learning connections. In another study by Missildine, Fountain, Summers and Gosselin (2013) of 589 nursing students, the flipped classroom was reported to require more work by the students, with the same students who showed improved learning not reporting improved satisfaction. Findings were found by Lage, Platt, & Treglia (2000) who found economics students to regard the flipped classroom as a harder class. However, not all studies showed that the flipped classroom was perceived to be harder. Pierce & Fox (2012), who flipped a renal pharmacotherapy module, did not find the same perceptions from their sample group of 71 university students. Enfield (2013) found his students describing the flipped experience as “appropriately challenging.”
The variety of unexpected activities in a flipped classroom could leave the students feeling unsettled, although students adapted and came to see the value of the cooperative approach (Strayer, 2012). Strayer (2012) further recommends providing for appropriate online communications tool to create a place for reflection and increase interaction. Some other recommendations to ease this strain have been offered. An “all or nothing” approach does not have to be employed in implementing a flipped class (Johnson & Renner, 2012). Flipping individual units or lessons is another way to flip. Strayer (2012) warns that this model may not be the preferred for an introductory course.
Students are used to receiving information via the transmittal model that assumes the brain is like an empty bucket with professors pouring knowledge in (King, 2013). With the flipped classroom, students actively participate in their learning, (King, 2013), and thus require more effort. Change requires adaptation.
Student Engagement
The limited research available seems to point towards increased student engagement. Clark (2013), in his study involving 42 ninth grade Algebra 1 students found that students were more engaged and more involved compared to those in the traditional classroom. On the other hand, Bathker (2013), on his action research study involving 18 high school physics students did not show student reported increase in motivation and engagement. In the university level, Enfield (2013) in his study of 50 multimedia students found that most considered the flipped approach as engaging.
Student Behavioral Engagement and Academic Performance
Student engagement goes hand in hand with academic performance. The relationship between student behavioral engagement and academic performance was investigated by Jung-Sook Lee in a sample of 3,268 fifteen-year-old students from 121 US schools. Her study showed evidence of the effects of student engagement on academic performance. Behavioral engagement, defined as effort and perseverance in learning, was found to be prerequisite, especially when learning difficult material.
Engagement is multi-faceted. Literature defines three types of engagement: Behavioral (participation), Emotional and Cognitive Engagement (Fredricks, Blumenfeld & Paris, 2004). As such, measuring engagement can be a complex process. Simpler tools, such as the Research Assessment Package to Schools (RAPS) developed by the Institute for Research and Reform in Education are available.
Videos
Pre-existing videos were used in a few studies. Moroney (2013), who used Khan Academy videos in one study involving 37 algebra college students, wrote that there is a distinct advantage to putting one’s own mark on the instruction by creating your own material. He also added that self-made videos would reduce the level of inconsistency in the student who is trying to absorb different pieces of instruction. …. agree stating self-prepared instruction gives teachers another chance to review the material. Videos don’t have to be production quality (Bergmann, 2013; Mason, Shuman & Cook, 2013). However, sometimes, the best option as a beginner may be to use existing videos (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). It is also important that the videos integrate well with the in-class activities (Strayer, 2012; Educause, 2012).
Videos for flipping are not limited to teachers talking to a camera. Several screencasting software programs are now available to capture anything on your screen, voice, a webcam and a digital pens. (Bergmann and Sams, 2012). There were no studies comparing the tools available as it relates to student engagement.
Flipping requires learning how to create screencasts or videos. Also necessary is the skill explaining concepts in clear, concise and bite-sized chunks (Tucker, 2012).
Concerns About Flipped Learning
Concerns about too much emphasis on lectures and homework have been raised (Stager, 2013; Nielsen, 2011) and that the need to flip is merely symptomatic of a bloated curriculum (Stager, 2013). Stager predicts most teachers will eliminated and mediocre ones be hired to create video lectures not customised to the specific needs of the class. Sams (2013) shares Stager’s concern re generic videos substituting teachers. Educause warns that the flipped classroom is an easy model to get wrong. “An effective flip requires careful preparation: recording lectures and preparing out-of-class and in-class activities that must be integrated.”
Conclusion
What I have learned about this endeavor from these resources include: that the flipped learning classroom model poses a huge potential for freeing up in-class time so teachers are free to engage their students with active learning activities. It’s not just about creating the direct instructional materials (video) and sending it as homework, but more importantly, it’s about making the best use of the face-to-face opportunities in class. The flipped classroom model benefits the students by helping them become active learners, more collaborative and innovative, including an increased opportunity for 1:1 teacher & student interaction. Concerns about the flipped classroom model include an increased cognitive load when flipping is introduced for the first time with a challenging topic, the need for teachers to learn to use new technologies for screencasts/videos, and students not doing “homework.” Limited studies are available at this time.