A Comparative Study on Achievement of Learning Outcomes through Flipped Classroom and Traditional Lecture Instructions

Abstract

The flipped classroom is a popular method of instruction for teaching all grades of students. Depending on the individual lecturers, flipped classrooms vary subject to the elements of the class, needs of students and the level of involvement. The objectives of this study were to compare the students learning outcomes achieved through the flipped classroom model and traditional lecture based instructions.

Full text

The flipped classroom is a popular method of instruction for teaching all grades of
students. Depending on the individual lecturers, flipped classrooms vary subject
to the elements of the class, needs of students and the level of involvement. The
objectives of this study were to compare the students learning outcomes achieved
through the flipped classroom model and traditional lecture based instructions.
BACKGROUND
MATERIALS AND METHOD
RESULTS
Table 3: Classroom experience as commented by the students and lecturers
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this study revealed higher scores obtained by the flip method
of teaching although no significant difference was observed between the two
methods. Students’ expressed their positive perception which reflects their
acceptance of this method. However, they suggest all topics are not suitable
which is similar to the opinion of the teachers. The success of this method
depends on the proper development of the resource materials, delivery
methods, assessment strategy, adequate facilities etc. Therefore, proper
planning of the educational managers is necessary in order to train the
teachers for their mindset change and use more flipped classes then the
traditional lecture and to make them competent in developing resources and
also to guide the students properly.
Table 1: Demographic profile of the students
Faculty of Dentistry SEGi University 1&4, Faculty of Medicine Asia Metropolitan University 2, Faculty of Medicine SEGi University 3
Md Nurul Islam1, Abdus Salam2, Munira Bhuiyan3, Sulinda Binti Daud4
A Comparative Study on Achievement of Learning Outcomes
through Flipped Classroom and Traditional Lecture Instructions .
REFERENCES
1. Arnott JA., Planey SL. (2017). Flipped classroom approaches lead to no improvement in learning outcomes or student perceptions. The FASEB Journal, 31(1), Supplement 751.14. 2. Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS). Health Science, SEGi University.
ttps://www.segi.edu.my/en/programmes/health-sciences/bachelor-of-dental-surgery-bds/. Accessed 18 July 2017. 3. Bishop JL, Verleger MA. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. 120thAmerican Society for Engineering Education National Conference
Proceedings, Atlanta, Georgia, 1-18. 4. Bouwmeester RAM, de Kleijn RAM, ten Cate OTJ, van Rijen HVM, Westerveld HE. (2016). How Do Medical Students Prepare for Flipped Classrooms? Med.Sci.Educ, 26,53–60. 5. Bull G, Ferster B. Kjellstrom W. (2012). Inventing the
flipped classroom. Learning & Leading with Technology, 40(1), 10-11. http://www.learningandleading-digital.com/learning_leading/201208?pg=12#pg12. Accessed on 12 July, 2017. Danker B. (2105). Using Flipped Classroom Approach to Explore Deep Learning in Large
Classrooms. The IAFOR Journal of Education, 3(1), 171-186. Enfield J. (2013). Looking at the impact of the flipped classroom model of instruction on undergraduate multimedia students at CSUN. TechTrends, 57(6), 14-27. Findlay-Thompson S, Mombourquette P. (2014).
Evaluation of a flipped classroom in an undergraduate business course. Business Education & Accreditation, 6 (1), 63-71. Goh PSC. (2012). The Malaysian Teacher Standards: A Look at the Challenges and Implications for Teacher Educators. Educational Research for Policy and
Practice; 1, 1-2. Hamdan N, McKnight P. McKnight K, Arfstrom KM. (2013). The flipped learning model: A white paper based on the literature review titled a review of flipped learning. Flipped Learning Network, Pearson, George Mason University. tp://flippedlearning.org/
wpcontent/ uploads/2016/07/WhitePaper_FlippedLearning.pdf. Accessed on 10July2017. Houston M. Lin L. (2012). Humanizing the Classroom by Flipping the Homework versus Lecture Equation. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of SITE 2012-Society for Information Technology &
Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1177-1182). Austin, Texas, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/p/39738/. Accessed on 22 August, 2017. Jamaludin R, Osman SZM, Wan Yusoff WM, Jasni
NFA. (2016). FLIPPED: A Case study in Fundamental of Accounting in Malaysian Polytechnic. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 3(1), 23- 31. Johnson LW, Renner JD. (2012). Effect of the flipped classroom model on a secondary computer applications course:
Student and teacher perceptions, questions and student achievement. A Doctoral Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Education and Human Development of the University of Louisville. http://theflippedclassroom.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/johnson-
renner-2012.pdf. Accessed on 12 July 2017. Marshall H. (2013). Three reasons to flip your classroom. Bilingual Basics, The newsletter of the Bilingual Education Interest Section and Teachers of English to Deaf Students.
ttp://newsmanager.commpartners.com/tesolbeis/print/2013-08-28/6.html. Accessed on 22 August 2017.
Mason GS, Shuman TR, Cook KE. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an
inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430-435.
McDonald C, Liddell J. (2017). Flipped Learning and its application to undergraduate
Variables Flipped class, n=25 Lecture class, n=25
Number Percent Number Percent
Gender
Male 11 44 832
Female 14 56 17 68
Ethnicity
Malay 4 16 520
Chinese 17 68 15 60
Indian 3 12 520
Others 1 4 0 0
This study was conducted among 50 first-year dental students of a private
University, Malaysia, whom were divided into two groups consisting of 25 students
in each. Dental Ergonomics topic was taught to both group using flipped classroom
model to one group and lecture based instruction to other group in morning and
afternoon session. At the end of each instructions, a mini-test was done using the
same MCQ questions. Percent of mean scores achieved by the flipped group of
students with lectured group of students were compared.
Flipped group of students achieved 91.67% and lectured group of students achieved
89.58% with no significant differences (p=0.28). However, students expressed their
positive perception on flipped classroom model. They also suggested all topics are
not suitable which is similar to the opinion of the teachers.
Table 2: Learning outcome as measured by the percentage of mean scores
obtained
Classroom Setting Mean Score
%
p
value
Gender Mean Score
%
p
value
Flipped
Class
All
Participants
91.67
0.28
Male 90.83
0.59
Female 92.50
Lecture
Class
All
Participants
89.58
Male 90.00
0.81
Female 89.38
Students
’Comments
•I have participated well in this method and learned very much
through
this method
•Flipped method is good but I think not all topics are suitable for
this
teaching method
•I have a very good interaction with my group as well as with the
lecturer
for learning
•Topics like Embryology is difficult in flipped method, I
prefer
conventional lecture
•I think Flipped classes are OK for applied topics
•I feel more engaged in flipped class
•To me, flipped class is not suitable at the beginning of Year-1 course.
•I want more classes through this method
Lecturers’Comments
•Not all topics are suitable for the flipped method of teaching
•Cannot teach all the topic in this way as timetable will not allow
•More than one lecturer is preferable
•Need special classroom arrangement
•Students are less stressed and less bored as they are playing the
active
role
•Lecturer is less concerned whether everyone paying attention to what
he
is saying