Effects of the Flipped Classroom Model on Student Performance for advanced placement high school chemistry students

Prévia do material em texto

Effects of the Flipped Classroom Model on Student Performance for
Advanced Placement High School Chemistry Students
David Schultz,†,‡ Stacy Duffield,*,‡ Seth C. Rasmussen,§ and Justin Wageman‡
†Davies High School, Fargo, North Dakota 58104, United States
‡School of Education, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58102, United States
§Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58102, United States
*S Supporting Information
ABSTRACT: This mixed-methods study investigated the effects of the flipped
classroom on academic performance of high school advanced placement chemistry
students. Student perceptions about the approach were also studied. The control group
consisted of students from the 2011−2012 academic year, in which traditional teaching
methods were used. The treatment group consisted of students from the 2012−2013
academic year, in which the flipped classroom approach was used. Identical assessments
were administered and analyzed through both descriptive statistics and independent t
tests. A statistically significant difference was found on all assessments with the flipped
class students performing higher on average. In addition, most students had a favorable
perception about the flipped classroom noting the ability to pause, rewind, and review
lectures, as well as increased individualized learning and increased teacher availability.
This contribution is part of a special issue on teaching introductory chemistry in the
context of the advanced placement (AP) chemistry course redesign.
KEYWORDS: General Public, Curriculum, Computer-Based Learning, Learning Theories, Student-Centered Learning,
High School/Introductory Chemistry
■ INTRODUCTION
Any good teacher strives to answer the question, “How can I
meet all of my students’ learning needs?” However, large class
sizes, diverse learners, standards, and limited class time may
prevent a teacher from supporting all students in reaching their
potential. Today, technological advances can take the classroom
one step closer to an answer via the flipped classroom
approach. This model of instruction is a “pedagogical approach
in which direct instruction moves from the group learning
space to the individual learning space, and the resulting group
space is transformed into a dynamic, interactive learning
environment where the educator guides students as they apply
concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.”1
The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the
flipped classroom model on student performance in an
advanced placement (AP) chemistry course at the high school
level. A secondary purpose was to investigate student
perceptions about the flipped approach and related technology.
The outcome of this study is important to educators as they
make decisions about the best ways to support student learning.
The research questions included:
(1) Do students in the flipped classroom perform differently
than students in a traditional classroom?
(2) What perceptions do students have about the flipped
classroom?
The Flipped Classroom
According to Sams et. al.,1 the term “flipped classroom”
describes the practice of “flipping” the traditional teaching
approach where content is delivered in class and practice
problems are done at home. In a flipped classroom, students
watch lectures outside of class through the use of screencasts,
and class time is spent engaging students through a variety of
learning activities.2 Although the flipped classroom model of
instruction has been popularized by Bergmann and Sams,2 its
use was first reported by Eric Mazur.3 Mazur incorporated
computer-based instruction to guide students through a unit
outside of class time. In this model, Mazur restructured his class
so that he was available to his physics students when he felt
they needed him most.
About 10 years later, the flipped classroom model began to
take shape in two separate studies. Lage, Platt, and Treglia4
created the “inverted classroom” to reach more students of
different learning styles. Their inversion consisted of multi-
media (video tapes and PowerPoint lectures with recorded
sound) to be viewed outside of class in a media lab or at home.
Student survey results showed the participating students found
the approach to be favorable over traditional teaching due to
increased student−instructor interaction, more active engage-
ment, and group collaboration.4 In a similar approach, a college
Special Issue: Advanced Placement (AP) Chemistry
Article
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
© XXXX American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc. A dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
professor used the Internet to disseminate his lecture notes and
online discussion boards to extend classroom discussions.5 As a
result of the flipped approach, students reported more personal
attention, more control over their learning, and engagement in
critical thinking.
In 2006, Bergmann and Sams2 began using online, taped
lectures to reach students who were frequently absent. Soon
after, other students from their school and around the country
began to watch and learn as well. According to Bergmann and
Sams,2 the greatest achievement of the flipped classroom is not
the videos but “greater student−teacher rapport” and “freeing
up class time to conduct higher quality and more engaging
activities”. They went on to state2
The time when my students really need me physically present
is when they get stuck and need my individual help. They do
not need me...to yak at them and give them content; they can
receive content on their own.
Although an article in Chemical & Engineering News6 reported
a college general chemistry instructor found student perform-
ance on exams were significantly improved from the traditional
approach to the flipped approach, quantitative research is
limited relating to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom.
However, numerous teachers have reported benefits ranging
from improved academic performance and increased student−
teacher interactions to improved classroom management and
use of other best practices. The number one teacher-reported
benefit is increased student−teacher interaction.2,4,7−10 By
creating more one-on-one time, students receive an educational
experience tailored to their individual learning style. In
addition, when teachers are able to build solid relationships
with their students, students are more likely to trust their
teachers and are motivated to do well.
Another frequently reported benefit is the creation of a
student-centered learning environment.2,4,8,11 Sparks reported
that teachers saw more “student engagement and accountability
because it [the flipped classroom] requires students to commit
to doing a lot more work on their own”.11 When students
became accustomed to the flipped approach, they developed an
increased sense of responsibility for their learning, and they
worked with their teachers to achieve learning goals.8 Lage et al.
also agreed with this statement reporting “...this type of
classroom demanded that students take ownership of their
learning”.4
Three additional teacher-identified benefits emerged from
the literature. First, the flipped classroom supports students
who have been absent to acquire content and skills via videos
outside of school.2 Second, differentiation is made easier
because the freed-up class time allows the instructor to learn
how to accommodate to each student.12 Furthermore, videos
also supply a means of differentiated instruction through the
use of the pause and rewind functions.2 Finally, improvements
to classroom management have been reported. In the flipped
classroom model, the teacher becomes the “guide on the side”
and roams the class looking for ways to scaffold learning.2 In
fact, at schools where flipped classrooms were implemented,
administrators reported a dramatic reduction in discipline
referrals and higher compliance in homework completions.13,14“Students are less frustrated and disruptive in class because
there is someone on hand to help one-on-one”.13
Alternately, it is important to note that flipped classrooms are
not always the best approach.15 Teachers need to evaluate
learning objectives and assessments to determine if flipping the
classroom is the best means for instruction. Another critic
warned educators to be mindful of the student population and
access to technology at home.16 Accommodations need to be
made in advance, whether it is burning DVDs, increasing
student access with flash drives, or extended use of the library.
Because flipping classrooms is a relatively new approach,
much of the current data are informal and unpublished. Stayer
compared the flipped and traditional method in his college-level
statistics classes.5 In the flipped classes, Strayer used an
intelligent tutoring system (ITS) to deliver lecture content
outside of class rather than self-created videos. In the
classroom, students worked in collaborative groups to complete
learning activities, which ranged from guided to open-ended.
The traditional course was delivered with PowerPoint lectures,
and students were assigned problems to work on outside of the
class. According to Stayer’s analysis, students were less satisfied
with how the structure of the flipped classroom aligned to the
learning tasks.5 Stayer suggests the innovative approach will
take time depending on student comfort and exposure to open-
ended problem solving.
At the secondary level, Musallam investigated the impact of
screencasts as a pretraining tool to manage the intrinsic
cognitive load, which is a student’s perceived level of difficulty
associated with learning something.17 According to Ayres:
“Overloading working memory inhibits learning; and therefore,
working memory load must be kept at a manageable level
through instructional strategies”.18 Musallam also found
students that received pretraining performed better on their
final assessment than those that did not.17 He suspected the
pretraining videos worked to lower the burden on the learner’s
working memory, enabling better learning.
In another version of the flipped classroom, researchers
compared the traditional approach to a flipped approach using
Khan Academy with a summer, remedial math course.8 In the
flipped class, students received a mixture of traditional-teacher
assistance and used Khan Academy videos for instruction; they
then proceeded with the guided software.8 The guided software
included practice problems and assessments that guided a
student through a mastery approach. Both the traditional and
flipped groups improved about the same amount, indicating no
major difference. Another interesting finding from the study
was the flipped group spent an extra 2−3 weeks on prior
knowledge content, which reduced the time spent learning the
new material. In essence, students spent less time on the tested
material and did just as well as students that did not.
■ RESEARCH CONTEXT
This action research study included students in grades 10−12
who attended a high school in the upper Midwest. The school
district resides in a small city school district with a population
of about 100,000 residents. During the 2012−2013 school year,
13.25% of the high school’s student population of 1,000
students qualified for free or reduced lunches.
AP chemistry mirrors introductory chemistry at the college
level. Each year approximately 40 students take AP chemistry.
Students choose to take this elective course for a variety of
reasons, such as preparation for college, enjoyment of the
sciences, further development of science knowledge and skills,
and to obtain college credit.
■ RESEARCH METHODS
This study employed a mixed methods approach, incorporating
both quantitative and qualitative techniques in an attempt to
Journal of Chemical Education Article
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXXB
triangulate research data.19 A quasi-experimental design was
used to analyze if a statistically significant difference existed in
academic performance on assessments between the control
group, which experienced a traditional approach, and the
experimental group, which experienced a flipped classroom.
Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and independ-
ent t tests to determine if the flipped approach impacted
student performance in an AP chemistry class.
A Likert scale questionnaire was used to collect student
perceptions about the flipped classroom model of instruction.
The questionnaire began with a statement that asked
individuals to respond on a continuum ranging from “strongly
agree” to “strongly disagree” with a neutral middle for which
teaching model the student preferred. These results were
analyzed with descriptive statistics. In addition to students
rating their responses, a follow-up question asked students to
rationalize their choice. This research study was approved by
the Institutional Review Board.
Participants
A convenience sample was drawn from 61 high school students
enrolled in an advanced placement chemistry program at a coed
public high school. The control group included 32 students, 15
male and 17 female, who were enrolled in AP chemistry during
the 2011−2012 school year. Their pre-existing test-score data
were used. The treatment group included 29 of the 43 students
enrolled in AP chemistry during the 2012−2013 school year.
These students were invited to participate in the research study,
and 29 provided consent. To determine if the control and
treatment groups were a good fit for comparison, GPA, age, and
gender distribution were considered. Table 1 provides a
demographic comparison of the control and treatment groups.
Of the 29 students in the treatment group, 12 were male and 17
were female. The GPA for the control group was 3.61, and the
GPA for the treatment group was 3.71. The experimental
group’s GPA was 3.71. Ages of participants in both groups
ranged from 15 to 18 years.
Intervention
During the traditional classroom experience, students received
direct instruction during class, and most practical application
occurred at home or the end of the class period. On average,
30−40 min of the 50 min class period was devoted to a mix of a
lecture and discussion. The remaining time was spent on book
problems or other learning activities. Homework consisted of
finishing book problems and reading sections to be covered the
following day.
Preparation for the flipped classroom approach began with
the unit plan. First, the learning objectives were divided into
logical sections, which were used to build the individual
screencasts. The next step involved preparation of the
PowerPoint lectures and corresponding notes. Each section
began with a statement of the learning objectives, followed by
vocabulary and a presentation of concepts and applications.
The students were provided with guided notes that outlined the
video lecture. Next, screencasts were recorded using Camtasia
Studio, a Bamboo annotation tablet, and a headset with
microphone. Editing took from 10 to 60 min and was largely
dependent upon the amount of time the instructor had
available.
After students watched the video, they completed a
postvideo accountability reflection through Google Forms.
The purpose of these reflections was twofold: (a) accountability
for watching videos and (b) informal, formative assessment of
student understandings. A Google Form is a survey tool that
allows for a variety of question formats, such as multiple choice,
free-response, rating scales, and checkboxes. The assessments
followed the same format each time, and included the
following:
(1) Name.
(2) Which video did you watch? (Multiple choice list)
(3) Summarize the video in 2−3 sentences. (Free response)
(4) Are there any topics from this section you are still fuzzy
on or struggled with? (Free response)
Flipped classroom experiences began with the problems or
an activity based on the video from the previous evening; most
days, students were assignedto watch a screencast lecture,
which would range between 10 and 15 min. Students reported
time spent on note taking would usually be twice the length of
the video. For example, a 10 min video would require 20 min to
both watch and take notes. Following each video, students
would complete the video reflection in Google Forms. In class,
the first 5 min were dedicated to reviewing the contents of the
homework video and discussion of questions that came up via
the reflections. The review would end with students
summarizing the video in their own words. The remainder of
class time, 40−45 min, was spent engaging in book problems or
a variety of other activities. While students worked, the teacher
circulated the room and assisted students. If students finished
early, they were able to watch that evening’s video.
Instrumentation
The two variables, academic performance and student
perceptions, were measured through assessments and a
questionnaire. Academic performance was measured by chapter
and final exams. Each chapter test was assessed for internal
consistency with the Kuder-Richardson formula 21 (KR-21).
The closer the value is to 1.00, the more reliable the data is.
The resulting statistics were above 0.75 for seven of the
assessments and 0.66 for the chapter 8−9 assessment. The
same tests used with the 2011−2012 control group were given
to the 2012−13 treatment group.
A questionnaire was used to study treatment group
perceptions about the flipped classroom. The questionnaire
consisted of a rating scale based on the Likert scale. It also
consisted of open-ended items that allowed students to explain
their choices.
Table 1. Demographic Comparisons of Control and
Treatment Group
Control Group Treatment Group
School Year 2011−12 2012−13
Number of Participants 32 29
Gender Comparisons
Males 15 12
Females 17 17
Grade Comparisons
10th graders 1 2
11th graders 9 12
12th graders 22 15
Ethnicity Comparisons
White (not Hispanic) 28 25
Asian/Pacific Islander 4 4
Journal of Chemical Education Article
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXXC
■ DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
This study was approximately four calendar months in duration
and included two nine-week academic grading periods. Seven
chapter tests were given during this time. At the end of the
study, a comprehensive final exam and the student perception
questionnaire were administered.
The first research question, concerning student academic
performance, was assessed with chapter tests and a semester
final exam. Descriptive statistics and independent t test analyses
were conducted to determine if a difference and direction of
academic performance between each group existed. The
descriptive statistics on the mean score comparison between
the traditional and flipped classroom groups are provided in the
Supporting Information. Table 2 presents the independent
sample t tests used to assess differences between each group’s
average scores.
There were statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in
student performance on all eight assessments between the
traditional group and the flipped classroom group. The flipped
classroom students scored higher compared to the traditional
classroom students on all eight assessments. See the Supporting
Information for means and standard deviations for student
performance on the assessments.
Gender
Additional data analyses were conducted to see if there was a
statistically significant difference in student performance
between the control group and experiment group with respect
to gender. The descriptive statistics on the mean score
comparison between the traditional and flipped classroom
groups for male and female students is provided in the
Supporting Information. Table 3 presents the independent t
test results for the separate groups of male and female students.
See the Supporting Information for the means and standard
deviation on the assessments by gender.
There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in student
performance on all eight assessments between both groups.
Male students in the flipped classroom scored higher than
males in the traditional group. Although females in the flipped
classroom scored higher on average, there were mixed results as
to statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in student
performance between the traditional and flipped classroom
groups.
Grade Level
Additional data analyses were conducted to see if a statistically
significant difference in average assessment scores between the
control group and experiment group with respect to grade level.
No statistical analyses were performed for 10th grade students
because of a small sample size (n = 3). The descriptive statistics
on the mean score comparison between the traditional and
flipped classroom groups for 11th grade students are provided
in the Supporting Information. Table 4 presents the
independent t test results for 11th grade students. The means
and standard deviations by grade level are presented in the
Supporting Information.
There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in student
performance between both groups for 7 out of 8 assessments.
With respect to 12th grade students and instructional mode,
there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in student
performance on 2 out of 8 assessments between both groups.
The descriptive and inferential statistics on the mean score
comparison between the traditional and flipped classroom
groups for 12th grade students are found in the Supporting
Information.
Student Perceptions
The second question, concerning student perceptions about the
flipped classroom, was assessed through two methods. The
rating scale was analyzed with descriptive statistical methods.
The open-ended responses were coded independently by two
Table 2. Independent t Test Results for Group Differences in
Student Performancea
df
Significance (2-
tailed)b
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Ch 1−3 Test 59 0.002 −3.95 1.20
Ch 4 Test 59 0.002 −4.67 1.44
Ch 5 Test 59 0.018 −3.08 1.26
Ch 7 Test 59 0.001 −4.32 1.19
Ch 8−9 Test 59 0.002 −3.76 1.16
Ch 10 Test 59 0.001 −4.34 1.29
Ch 11 Test 59 0.004 −5.34 1.75
Semester 1 Final 59 0.009 −8.13 3.02
aN = 61. bStatistically significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 3. Independent t Test Results for Group Differences in
Student Performance for Male and Female Students
df
Significance (2-
tailed)a
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Female Studentsb
Ch 1−3 Test 32 0.077 −3.15 1.72
Ch 4 Test 32 0.023 −4.00 1.68
Ch 5 Test 32 0.023 −4.00 1.68
Ch 7 Test 32 0.231 −2.29 1.88
Ch 8−9 Test 32 0.029 −3.88 1.70
Ch 10 Test 32 0.177 −2.47 1.79
Ch 11 Test 32 0.078 −3.00 1.65
Semester 1 Final 32 0.144 −2.59 1.73
Male Studentsc
Ch 1−3 Test 25 0.008 −4.93 1.71
Ch 4 Test 25 0.045 −5.23 2.48
Ch 5 Test 25 0.041 −5.23 2.42
Ch 7 Test 25 0.023 −3.92 1.62
Ch 8−9 Test 25 0.003 −5.14 1.59
Ch 10 Test 25 0.001 −5.36 1.37
Ch 11 Test 25 0.008 −5.98 2.09
Semester 1 Final 25 0.014 −8.68 3.28
aStatistically significant at the 0.05 level. bN = 34. cN = 27.
Table 4. Independent t Test Results for Group Differences in
Student Performance for 11th Grade Studentsa
df
Significance (2-
tailed)b
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Ch 1−3 Test 17 0.000 −6.55 1.51
Ch 4 Test 17 0.008 −7.67 2.53
Ch 5 Test 17 0.012 −6.45 2.30
Ch 7 Test 17 0.009 −6.29 2.13
Ch 8−9 Test 17 0.052b −5.95 2.85
Ch 10 Test 17 0.000 −9.98 1.83
Ch 11 Test 17 0.008 −12.38 4.08
Semester 1 Final 17 0.003 −16.04 4.60
aN = 19. bStatistically significant at the 0.05 level.
Journal of Chemical Education Article
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXXD
researchers and then compared to determine consistency.
Figure 1 summarizes the results of the survey. Responses by
item are presented in the Supporting Information.
The majority of students preferred or strongly preferred the
flipped classroom model. The most frequent response in favor
of the flipped classroom was the ability to pause, rewind, and go
back to review (12). Other favorable responses were teacher
availabilityto help in class (9), ability to learn at own pace (9),
class time to apply knowledge and work with classmates (6),
multiple opportunities to learn the material [at home and in
class] (6), ability to ask questions outside of class (4), and
ability to stay caught up when absent (3).
Students who preferred the traditional approach to
instruction had a variety of explanatory responses. The two
most stated reasons were the inability to ask questions during
video lectures (6) and being accustomed to traditional
instruction (4). Additional responses include that the videos
were too long (2), they focus better in class (2), and they
missed class interaction (2). Interestingly, all four students with
a traditional preference were female. Students with no
preference stated either method would allow them to learn
and apply the material (3). The complete results of the survey
questions are provided in the online Supporting Information.
Summary of Results
A statistically significant difference in academc performance
existed between each group. Students in the flipped classroom
group on average scored higher on unit assessments than
students in the traditional classroom group. Statistically
significant differences in academic performance occurred
between male students of the traditional and flipped classroom
groups. Flipped classroom males performed higher than
traditional ones on all eight assessments. Female students
showed less statistically significant differences in academic
performance, with differences occurring on only 3 out of 8
assessments. A common theme of traditional preference and
negative perceptions for the flipped classroom was also more
common for female students. Statistically significant differences
in acadmeic performance occurred between 11th grade students
of the traditional and flipped classroom groups on 7 out of 8
assessments. Eleventh-grade students performed higher in the
flipped classroom than those in a traditional classroom.
Twelfth-grade students showed little statistically significant
differences in academic performance, only performing better on
2 out of 8 assessments. Analysis of grade-level perceptions
indicate no clear trends.
The majority of students preferred the flipped classroom
mode of instruction compared to the traditional approach.
Favorable responses for the flipped classroom included student
ability to apply their knowledge in class with the teacher
present; ability to pause, rewind, and review video lectures; and
ability to learn at one’s own pace. Students who preferred the
traditional approach reported they were more familiar with this
method, and they stated that the teacher was not available
during video lecture to answer questions. Students with no
preference reported that either method could help them learn
and apply the content.
Other student perceptions included positive and negative
aspects of the flipped classroom and advice for future teachers
considering the flipped classroom model. Positive features
included the ability to pause, rewind, and review video lectures;
learn at one’s own pace; work in class with the teacher present;
the ability to stay caught up when absent; the ability to ask
questions outside of class; and a better focus with videos.
Negative features included the teacher being unavailable during
video lectures, the videos were too long, missing a video and
would get behind, missed classroom interaction, and technol-
ogy issues. A unique negative issue reported was having two
flipped classes created more homework. The advice students
have for future flipped classroom teachers is to have a blend of
flipped and traditional instruction, be sure videos are clear and
thorough, keep videos under 15 min in length, have a quick
review in class, and ensure accountability for watching the
videos.
■ CONCLUSIONS
Independent t test analyses indicated that there were
statistically significant differences in student performance on
all assessments, supporting the notion that increasing student−
teacher interactions2,4,7−10 and creating a student-centered
learning environment2,4,7,10 will enhance student learning.
Increases in student performance are likely the result of three
main areas. First, student learning is put in the students’
hands.2,4,8,11 The technology benefits of being able to pause and
rewind their teacher to hear and see the lecture again promotes
individualized, self-paced learning. As one student reported, “I
get really embarrassed if I ask a question...when everyone else
seems to understand it except me. I was not embarrassed to
rewind the videos because no one was there to watch me do
that.” Second, students felt there were two opportunities to
learn the material, once via video and once during class. In a
sense, this has always been the case in the traditional classroom
through classroom lessons and homework. However, the
advantage of the flipped classroom is students were able to
integrate and apply their knowledge in the classroom.9 Third,
by moving direct instruction outside of the classroom, more
time is created in the classroom for additional teacher
support.2,4,7−10 A student explained, “I find it more beneficial
to do the problems in class because I can ask the teacher
questions if I don’t understand something.”
Data analyses uncovered two unexpected results. First, male
students performed better as a result of the flipped classroom as
compared to female students. Second, 11th grade students
scored higher; whereas, little to no statistically significant
differences were found for 12th grade students. This particular
finding was difficult to pinpoint because the qualitative data did
not have any trends with respect to grade level. The 12th grade
Figure 1. Reported student instructional preferences.
Journal of Chemical Education Article
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXXE
students may be more reluctant to change their learning
methods as they are close to completing school. Students also
stated it was easier to stay caught up or get ahead in a flipped
classroom. One student said, “It’s also very easy to keep up with
the class whenever I have to miss school for an illness or
activities.”
Students gave suggestions for future flipped classrooms. They
reported preferring a blended approach to the flipped
classroom, meaning a combination of traditional and flipped
lessons. They suggested difficult concepts be presented in class
and not through video, explaining that whichever component of
a learning target, content learning or practice, was more difficult
to grasp, should occur in the classroom. One student reported,
“I prefer to simply watch the videos on the simpler topics, but
it’s great to have someone explain, in simpler terms, the more
complex terms.” Students also said it is important that teachers
create clear concise videos that are under 15 min. As
recommended by Bergmann and Sams,2 students reported
the time spent on longer videos was frustrating at times and
that clarity is important. Lastly, teachers should plan to spend
about 5 min the next day to review the video. For this study,
Google Forms were used for student accountability and
informal assessment. After watching a flip video, students
would complete a video reflection. These reflections provided
assurance that students were watching the videos and highlight
any misconceptions or student questions. Students reported
mixed feelings about the reflections, some stated they were
time-consuming, but others said they appreciated being able to
express their individual needs.
There are limitations to this study. First, the sample size was
small with 61 total participants, 32 in the control group, and 29
in the treatment group. Second, the sample is specific, with the
study taking place in an AP chemistry class. Teachers planning
to implement the flipped classroom should be aware of the time
requirements for creating videos and may wish to consider
gradually building flipped units. Working with another teacher
to share theworkload of building the video library can also
reduce the time demand for this potentially beneficial approach.
■ ASSOCIATED CONTENT
*S Supporting Information
Means and Standard Deviations for Student Performance on
Assessments; Responses by Item for Student Perception
Survey. This material is available via the Internet at http://
pubs.acs.org.
■ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail: stacy.duffield@ndsu.edu.
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■ REFERENCES
(1) Sams, A.; Bergmann, J.; Daniels; D.; Bennett, B.; Marshall, H. W.;
Arfstrom, K. M. What is Flipped Learning? http://flippedlearning.org/
cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_
FNL_Web.pdf (accessed Apr 2014).
(2) Bergmann, J.; Sams, A. Flip your classroom: Reach Every Student in
Every Class Every Day; ASCD: Eugene, OR, 2012.
(3) Arnaud, C. H. Flipping Chemistry Classrooms. Chem. Eng. News
2013, 91 (12), 41−43.
(4) Mazur, E. Can We Teach Computers to Teach? Comput. Phys.
1991, 5, 31−38.
(5) Lage, M. J.; Platt, G. J.; Treglia, M. Inverting the Classroom: A
Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment. J. Econ. Ed.
2000, 31 (1), 30−43.
(6) Strayer, J. F. Effects of the Classroom Flip on the Learning
Environment: A Comparison of Learning Activity in a Traditional
Classroom and a Flip Classroom that Used an Intelligent Tutoring System.
Doctoral Dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 2007.
(7) Fulton, K. The flipped classroom: Transforming Education at
Byron High School. Technol. Horiz. Educ. 2012, 39 (3), 18−19.
(8) Greenberg, B.; Medlock, L.; Stephens, D. Blend My Learning:
Lessons Learned from a Blended Learning Pilot. http://blendmylearning.
files.wordpress.com/2011/12/lessons-learned-from-a-blended-
learning-pilot4.pdf (accessed Apr 2014).
(9) Pape, L.; Sheehan, T.; Worrell, C. How to Do More with Less.
Learn. Leading Technol. 2012, 39 (6), 18−22.
(10) Roshan, S. The Best Way to Reach Each Student? http://www.
thedailyriff.com/articles/the-best-way-to-reach-each-student-private-
school-flips-learning-547.php (accessed Apr 2014).
(11) Sparks, S. D. Schools “Flip” for Lesson Model Promoted by
Khan Academy. Educ. Week 2011, 31 (5), 12−14.
(12) Weist, K. What My Students are Saying about Flipped/Mastery
Chemistry Class. http://flippingoutkim.blogspot.com/ (accessed Apr
2014).
(13) Álvarez, B. Flipping the Classroom: Homework in Class, Lessons at
Home. http://www.learningfirst.org/flipping-classroom-homework-
class-lessons-home (accessed Apr 2014).
(14) Higgins, L. School’s Radical Flip Gets Results; Detroit Free Press:
Detroit, MI, October 23, 2011.
(15) Wright, S. The Flip: Why I Love it, How I Use It. http://blogs.
kqed.org/mindshift/2011/07/the-flip-why-i-love-it-how-i-use-it/ (ac-
cessed Apr 2014).
(16) Nielsen, L. Five Reasons I’m Not Flipping Over the Flipped
Classroom. http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com/2011/10/five-
reasons-im-not-flipping-over.html (accessed Apr 2014).
(17) Musallam, R. Effects of Using Screencasting as a Multimedia Pre-
Training Tool to Manage the Intrinsic Cognitive Load of Chemical
Equilibrium Instruction for Advanced High School Chemistry Students.
Doctoral Dissertation, University of San Francisco: San Francisco, CA.
2010.
(18) Ayres, P. Impact of reducing intrinsic cognitive load on learning
in a mathematical domain. Appl. Cognit. Psychol. 2006, 20 (3), 287−
298.
(19) Drew, C. J.; Hardman, M. L.; Hosp, J. L. Designing and
Conducting Research in Education; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, 2008.
Journal of Chemical Education Article
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400868x | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXXF
http://pubs.acs.org
http://pubs.acs.org
mailto:stacy.duffield@ndsu.edu
http://flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdf
http://flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdf
http://flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/46/FLIP_handout_FNL_Web.pdf
http://blendmylearning.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/lessons-learned-from-a-blended-learning-pilot4.pdf
http://blendmylearning.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/lessons-learned-from-a-blended-learning-pilot4.pdf
http://blendmylearning.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/lessons-learned-from-a-blended-learning-pilot4.pdf
http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-best-way-to-reach-each-student-private-school-flips-learning-547.php
http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-best-way-to-reach-each-student-private-school-flips-learning-547.php
http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-best-way-to-reach-each-student-private-school-flips-learning-547.php
http://flippingoutkim.blogspot.com/
http://www.learningfirst.org/flipping-classroom-homework-class-lessons-home
http://www.learningfirst.org/flipping-classroom-homework-class-lessons-home
http://blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2011/07/the-flip-why-i-love-it-how-i-use-it/
http://blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2011/07/the-flip-why-i-love-it-how-i-use-it/
http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com/2011/10/five-reasons-im-not-flipping-over.html
http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com/2011/10/five-reasons-im-not-flipping-over.html