Source: Education and Information Technologies; Vol. 26, Iss. 3, pages 3057-3076
(Reviewed by the Portal Team)
The Teaching Principles and Methods (TPM) course is an extremely important professional knowledge program that teaches preservice teachers about the methods and techniques to be applied during their teaching careers, providing them with the theoretical knowledge that should be enhanced with practice.
Testing the FC model in the context of this course is crucial for ensuring the efficiency of the lesson so as to spare more time for practice.
Furthermore, it is thought the in-class and out-of-class learning environments, designed according to the FC model, will help preservice teachers to build bridges between theory and practice, to prioritize active and cooperative learning, to contribute to the development of basic teaching skills, to increase the employment of technology and to minimize the problems faced in the teaching-learning process.
With all this in mind, the prospective teachers’ achievements, motivations and opinions about the implementation process are investigated through the following questions:
1. What is the effect of the flipped classroom model on the academic achievement of preservice teachers?
2. What is the effect of the flipped classroom model on preservice teachers’ motivations related to the course?
3. What are the opinions of preservice teachers about the use of the flipped classroom model for the Teaching Principles and Methods course?
For this study, a combined quantitative and qualitative research method was adopted.
The quantitative dimension, as the main driver of the research, involved a quasi-experimental design with pre-test - post-test control groups.
The qualitative data offered a subsidiary perspective that supported the quantitative data.
In the quantitative dimension, a semi-experimental pattern with a pretest-posttest control group was used.
In the experimental design, the participants were subjected to measurements of dependent variables (Creswell 2012).
The qualitative dimension of the study involved a descriptive survey design, in which the descriptive function of science was in the foreground (Yıldırım and Şimşek 2013).
The participants of the study were 78 pre-service teachers studying in two different teacher education programs.
The achievement test and scales were applied to pre-service teachers of different departments who were taking the Teaching Principles and Methods (TPM) course within the faculty of education, and classes with no significant difference in terms of pretest scores were selected.
In the implementation stage, in-class and out-of-class practices planned previously by the researcher for the TPM course, and that continued throughout the course duration (14 weeks/3 lessons per week), were carried out for the experimental group students.
The pre-service teachers in the experimental group benefited from the course videos and supporting materials during the extracurricular process and answered interactive questions in certain sections of the course videos.
The length of time that the students viewed the videos and the correct answer rates to the online questions were monitored regularly by the system every week.
In the classroom, the experimental group participants were informed about the process, and were monitored while watching the videos.
In the classroom, they carried out the activities detailed in the student-centered activity plan prepared by the researcher.
The activities were designed in such a way that the preservice teachers worked either together or in groups.
No interventions were made in the control group during the implementation stage, with lessons carried out in accordance with the existing curriculum using traditional methods.
In this group, the lessons were mostly teacher-centered, and methods and techniques, such as direct lectures, presentations (PowerPoint slides), demonstrations and question-answer drills, were used in the classroom.
Outside of the classroom, the pre-service teachers completed their weekly tasks, if any, and prepared for the next week.
The achievement test and scales were applied to the experimental and control groups as a pre-test at the very outset of the implementation, and again as a post-test at the end.
At the end of the research, the opinions of the participants on the implementation process and the FC model were obtained.
The achievement test and motivation scale were used to answer the first two questions of the study.
The qualitative data garnered from the third question in the study were collected through the survey form developed by the researcher.
Results and discussion
After conducting the TPM course through the application of an FC model, an increase was noted in the achievement scores of the participants.
The effect size value, indicating the significance level of the difference, was found to be high in the analyses, indicating a significant impact of the experimental implementation.
Studies in literature have on the whole reported that the FC model increases academic achievement among students (Angadi et al. 2019; Cheng et al. 2018; Ozudogru and Aksu 2020; Wenzler 2017).
This can be attributed to the fact that the model increases student achievement by enhancing participation in out-of-class course videos, in-class interactions and participation in active learning activities (Wan 2017).
In addition, it is known that the students’ attendance of the class, when prepared as prescribed by the model (Halili and Zainuddin 2015; Mojtahedi et al. 2020), the constructivist learning environment in which active learning activities are engaged (Sletten 2017) and the potential offered by the model for immediate feedback (McGivney-Burelle and Xue 2013) all have a positive effect on academic achievement.
The motivation values of the experimental group were higher than in the control group in an intergroup comparison, which is in line with the findings of studies in related literature (Chiou et al. 2020; Nikitova et al. 2020).
The preservice teachers considered the FC model to be appropriate for the TPM course, and they expressed a desire to see the course taught using this model in the future.
They stated that they had found it to be useful in several aspects, such as in ensuring active participation and effective time management, and contributing to their teaching skills by allowing them to put theoretical ideas into practice.
The preservice teachers stated that the model allowed a more efficient use of time in the classroom, concurring with similar results in literature (Awidi and Paynter 2018; Ozudogru and Aksu 2020).
Moreover, some of the preservice teachers participating in the present study stated that they had learned the subjects better and with more permanence through the use of the FC model, and there have been several studies reporting similar results (Haghighi et al. 2019; Jeong et al. 2018).
The participant’s opinions of the opportunity provided by the model to combine theory and practice show that more time could be devoted to student-centered activities. These in-class and out-of-class activities come together as a mutually supportive whole.
The preservice teachers acquired theoretical knowledge outside the classroom, and had the opportunity to put it into practice in the classroom when participating in student-centered activities.
The preservice teachers stated that the FC model had helped them prepare for the lesson, and had contributed to their efforts to improve their teaching skills.
Aside from the positive opinions among the preservice teachers about the FC model, there were also some criticisms of the model’s technical aspects which concurred with the findings of a study conducted with preservice teachers by Lee and Martin (2019).
The criticisms were levelled at such disadvantages as the lack of access to the necessary technologies among some learners, and technical ability problems in the use of instructional videos.
At this point, it can be suggested that educational institutions should establish the appropriate technical infrastructure and ensure that all students have sufficient access to it.
Various social media tools can be used to address the problems of preservice teachers, including obtaining adequate feedback and being able to ask questions.
Angadi, N. B., Kavi, A., Shetty, K., & Hashilkar, N. K. (2019). Effectiveness of flipped classroom as a teaching-learning method among undergraduate medical students - an interventional study. Journal of Education Health Promotion, 8, 211.
Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2018). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269–283.
Cheng, L., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Antonenko, P. (2018). Effects of the flipped classroom instructional strategy on students' learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Technology Research & Development, 1-32.
Chiou, C.-C., Tien, L.-C., & Tang, Y.-C. (2020). Applying structured computer-assisted collaborative concept mapping to flipped classroom for hospitality accounting. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 26
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Haghighi, H., Jafarigohar, M., Khoshsima, H., & Vahdany, F. (2019). Impact of flipped classroom on EFL learners’ appropriate use of refusal: Achievement, participation, perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(3), 261–293.
Halili, S. H., & Zainuddin, Z. (2015). Flipping the classroom: What we know and what we do not. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning (TOJDEL), 3(1), 28–35.
Jeong, J., Cañada-Cañada, F., & González-Gómez, D. (2018). The study of flipped-classroom for pre-service science teachers. Education Sciences, 8(4), 163.
Lee, Y., & Martin, K. I. (2019). The flipped classroom in ESL teacher education: An example from CALL. Education and Information Technologies , 25, 2605–2633.
McGivney-Burelle, J., & Xue, F. (2013). Flipping calculus. PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 23(5), 477–486.
Mojtahedi, M., Kamardeen, I., Rahmat, H., & Ryan, C. (2020). Flipped classroom model for enhancing student learning in construction education. Journal of Civil Engineering Education, 146(2)
Nikitova, I., Kutova, S., Shvets, T., Pasichnyk, O., & Matsko, V. (2020). “Flipped learning” methodology in professional training of future language teachers. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 19– 31
Ozudogru, M., & Aksu, M. (2020). Pre-service teachers’ achievement and perceptions of the classroom environment in flipped learning and traditional instruction classes. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27-43
Sletten, S. R. J. (2017). Investigating flipped learning: Student self-regulated learning, perceptions, and achievement in an introductory biology course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(3), 347–358
Wan, F. H. (2017). An exploration of online behaviour engagement and achievement in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. Computers & Education, 114, 79–91.
Wenzler, H. R. (2017). The flipped classroom model and academic achievement: A pre and posttest comparison groups study (Doctoral Dissertation). Northcentral University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. (8th Ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.