Flipped Classroom
Flipped Classroom
1. INTRODUCTION
Peck and Dorricot (1994) state that technological tools allow the teachers to make a
difference, they can personalize instruction and come up with the ways that allow the
students to discover the facts that they can use in acquiring and developing new knowledge.
The use of technology enables the students to go beyond the target learning goal. Since
technology is rampant and many can access, it can be used as platform for students to do
meaningful work.
In any case, this study focused on the recently developed technology-aided teaching
approach called “flipped classroom”. As a relatively new teaching approach, it is not well-
researched especially in English as a learning area (Education First, 2015) in the Asian
context (Thu Bui, 2018). Hamdan, McKnight, McKnight, and Arfstrom (2013) state that
flipped classroom is effective in Science and Math. Additionally, the study of Love, Hodge,
Grandgenette, and Swift (2013), for instance, found that in a flipped classroom approach,
students significantly increased in their scores in sequential examinations on linear algebra.
Similarly, in Marcey and Brint‟s (2011) study, 75 percent of students in a biology class had
learned more in a flipped classroom approach than in the traditional approach. They posit
that the flipped classroom allowed the students to experience ‘cinelectures’ which provided
great benefits to learn the lesson.
Research Problem
Clearly, it can be observed that flipped classroom has been found effective in STEM
learning areas. Nevertheless, there is dearth of data when flipped classroom is used as an
approach to teach critical thinking and reading comprehension in an ESL contexts. It is for
this reason that the researchers conducted this study to find out if flipped classroom can also
be used effectively in teaching English as a second language with special focus on improving
(1) critical thinking levels, and (2) reading comprehension levels.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The flipped classroom is a teaching approach in which the typical lecture is done
outside the confines of the classroom. In this approach, prior to attending the class, students
watch video lectures that the teacher had selected from online sites. This does not necessarily
mean that any random video is allowed for the purpose of the flipped classroom. The video
lectures should have to satisfy the necessary content that will develop the competencies of the
learners in the learning area. It is important to note, however, that the lectures are not only
limited to the video format. It can also be in the audio format as alternative or addition to the
video which can be accessed by the students (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). The idea of a flipped
classroom promotes the concepts of active learning and student engagement. The scheduled
class time is spent into workshops where students clarify the content of the lessons they have
watched earlier. Subsequently, this leads to collaborative activities that serve as avenues for
students to put everything they have learned into practice. Hence, teacher functions as a
facilitator or coach encouraging the students to learn on their own effort (Edutopia, 2008).
Although flipped classroom appears to be a favorable approach, it does not suggest an
easy procedure. It requires time for careful planning and preparation. EDUCASE Learning
Initiative (2012) states that recording lectures requires a lot of effort for both teacher and
students because all learning elements must be carefully integrated. In this approach, students
may still complain about the loss of face-to-face lectures. They may also think that it is safe
to skip a class because the idea of having the lessons available online already gives them
solitary learning opportunities. Flipped classroom is a kind of teaching approach that requires
trust among the students. Since the lessons are recorded and uploaded in different online
sites, it would be difficult to monitor students‟ participation. Not having the assurance that all
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies 258
Volume 2, Issue 3, 2020
students will cooperate in a flipped classroom approach means losing the confidence of
achieving the target learning goal (Edutopia, 2008).
Despite some downsides of flipped classroom, it is still believed that flipped
classroom approach promotes meaningful interaction. Students under the said approach
become active participants in the education process. It develops the sense of responsibility
among the learners by giving them greater impetus to experiment and share what they have
learned. Activities can be done by the students without much supervision and communication
among students can be in a form of dynamic session. It is also a great way to achieve
mastery, the idea of having the lesson accessible among the students wherever they are
increases their time allotted for learning (Danker, 2015).
The discussion and activities used outside the class provide opportunities for the
students to develop their critical thinking, reading comprehension, creativity and
communication. Since knowledge acquisition is being done outside the class, students can
discuss the lesson with their peers and can immediately raise their concern and clarification
regarding the lesson (Aronson, Arfstorm & Tam, 2013) and they can devote the instructional
hours in the classroom to more engaging tasks rather than just passively receiving
information from the teacher. This manifests that in a flipped classroom, students are in
control of their own learning (Spino & Trego, 2015) and that teachers are more active
facilitators of learning rather than givers of information.
approach became more vigilant with the information they acquired. Hence, they became more
rational as they expressed their own point of view. Collectively, it appears that the ideas of
Alsowat (2016) and Huong, Huy, and Ha (2018) agree that the domains of higher-order
thinking skills and critical thinking are shared and can therefore be interchangeable. This
does not imply, however, that the two concepts are absolutely synonymous. Nevertheless,
they are, in a certain perspective, related and cannot exist without the other.
Research Design
This study used a true experimental research design that focused on unpacking the effects
of flipped classroom approach in enhancing critical thinking and reading comprehension
levels of senior high school ESL learners at a public urban high school in the Philippines.
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies 260
Volume 2, Issue 3, 2020
Pre-tests for critical thinking and reading comprehension, and post-tests for the same
variables were administered to determine the results of the study.
Participants
The respondents of the study consisted of 212 randomly selected senior high school
learners. The total number of actual respondents was acquired using the sample size
determination formula with the application of proportional allocation per stratum based on
the total number of senior high school students enrolled in the said high school in academic
year 2018-2019. The respondents of the study were equally divided into two groups: 106
ESL learners were assigned for the experimental group and 106 ESL learners for control
group. The respondents of the study came from the General Academic Strand (GAS),
Accountancy and Business Management (ABM) Strand, Humanities and Social Sciences
(HUMSS) Strand and Technical-Vocational (TVL) Strand offered by the school for senior
high school students.
Although the respondents were randomly selected from the total population, the pool
of respondents had to satisfy that their academic performance rating in the English language
classes is average. Hence, the pool of respondents was composed of teacher-nominated
students who fall under the average performance in the English language classes and this pool
of respondents was subsequently and ultimately selected in random for their assignment in
either the control group or the experimental group.
Test Scores/
Levels Critical Thinking Skills
Mean scores
ESL learners who belong to this level were able to
manifest the following skills of critical thinking:
Level 1 Basic 1-11 identify problems and their symptoms;
build awareness in situation and make good
inferences in context; and
organize thoughts and set goals in order to solve
problems
The levels of the instrument were patterned in Can Do Descriptors for the Levels of
English Language Proficiency authored by the Board of Regents of the University of
Wisconsin (2019) in behalf of the World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment
Consortium (WIDAC). WIDAC, in their descriptors, used five levels in describing the
English language proficiency of the students. Such levels are entering, beginning, developing,
expanding and bridging. Each level elaborated the skills manifested by the students. Such
skills were identified from the tests taken by the students in reading, writing, speaking and
listening (Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin (2019).
Similar to the descriptors created by WIDAC, the researchers used five levels to
describe the critical thinking levels of the ESL learners prior and after the utilization of two
different teaching approaches. Relatively, the researchers came up with their own level
descriptors, which are ‘basic’, ‘good’, ‘better’, ‘great’, and ‘excellent’. Each level specifies
the critical thinking manifested by the learners after every pre-test and post-test administered.
of the post-tests were analyzed and compared to the baseline data in order to determine if
there is a significant difference between flipped classroom approach and lecture-discussion
approach in enhancing critical thinking and reading comprehension levels of the ESL
learners.
After gathering all the needed data, the test scores obtained by the respondents in
pretest and posttest were computed by a statistician using t-test of two independent samples
assuming equal variances to determine if there is a significant difference between the flipped
classroom approach and the lecture-discussion approach in enhancing the critical thinking
and reading comprehension levels of the ESL learners.
Table 3. Baseline Data of the Control and Experimental Groups for Critical Thinking and Reading
Comprehension based on Mean Scores (N=212)
Dependent Variables Groups Mean Scores Level Level Descriptors
Control 10.8679 1 Basic
Critical Thinking
Experimental 10.1981 1 Basic
Control 17.7736 2 Good
Reading Comprehension
Experimental 17.5283 2 Good
Based on the results of the critical thinking pre-test, data reveal that the control
group acquired a mean score of 10.8679. On the other hand, the experimental group obtained
a mean score of 10.1981. The difference between the mean scores of the two groups is .67 in
favour of the control group. This implies that ESL learners in the control group scored
relatively higher than the experimental group. Nevertheless, both groups manifested the same
level of critical thinking based on the mean scores of the pre-test, i.e. ‘basic level’. Hence, it
may be safe to assume that integration of teaching approaches may be considered to develop
the critical thinking level of the respondents (Abrami, Bernard, Borokhovski, Wade, Surkes,
Tamim, and Zhang, 2008).
With regard to the reading comprehension pre-test, data show that the control group
acquired a mean score of 17.7736 while the experimental group obtained a mean score of
17.5283. The difference of the mean scores of the two groups is .25 in favor of the control
group. This implies that ESL learners in the control group scored relatively higher than the
experimental group. Nonetheless, both control and experimental group manifested the same
level of reading comprehension skills based on the pre-test results, i.e. ‘good level’ which
indicates that both were comparable prior to the utilization of flipped classroom approach and
lecture-discussion approach. Thus, it may be a good opportunity for teaching approaches to
come into play to enhance reading comprehension levels (Stearns, 2012).
Table 4. Post-test Data of the Control and Experimental Groups for Critical Thinking and Reading
Comprehension based on Mean Scores (N=212)
Dependent Variables Groups Mean Scores Level Level Descriptors
Control 14.5472 2 Good
Critical Thinking
Experimental 18.8679 3 Better
Control 21.0472 3 Better
Reading Comprehension
Experimental 26.7830 4 Great
Based on the results of the critical thinking post-test, the control group acquired a
mean score of 14.5472 which fell under the ‘good level’. On the other hand, the experimental
group obtained a mean score of 18.8679 which made them reach the ‘better level’. Both
groups improved their critical thinking levels after the implementation of the flipped
classroom and the lecture-discussion approach. The control group which is initially in the
‘basic level’ reached the ‘good level’. On the other hand, the experimental group which is, at
first, in the ‘basic level’ ended in the ‘better level’.
As regards the results of the reading comprehension posttest, it appears that the
control group acquired a mean score of 21.0472 whereas the experimental group obtained a
mean score of 26.7830. Both groups improved in their reading comprehension level after the
utilization of the flipped classroom approach and the lecture-discussion approach. Control
group which was in the ‘good level’ of reading comprehension now reached the ‘better level’
while the experimental group which was also in the ‘good level’ in the pre-test phase now
ended in the ‘great level’. It appears that the deliberate use of a teaching approach plays a
vital role in enhancing reading comprehension levels of the learners (Spino & Trego, 2015).
Intervention Differences
Table 5 presents the difference between the flipped classroom approach and the
lecture-discussion approach in enhancing the critical thinking and the reading comprehension
levels of the ESL learners.
Table 5. Comparison of the Control Group and Experimental Group Mean Scores in Critical
Thinking and Reading Comprehension Levels (N=212)
Dependent Groups Mean Scores Standard t-value p-value (Two-
Variables Deviation tailed)
Critical Thinking Control 14.5472 4.88951 31.226 0.000
Experimental 18.8679 5.42845
Reading Control 21.0472 7.46979 -35.019 0.000
Comprehension Experimental 26.7830 8.57239
Based on the mean scores of the two groups in critical thinking post-test, data reveal
that the control group who received the lecture-discussion approach acquired a mean score of
14.5472 with a standard deviation of 4.89 while the experimental group who underwent the
flipped classroom approach obtained a mean score of 18.8679 with a standard deviation of
5.43. Using the t-test of two-sample (independent samples) with equal variances assumed,
there is a significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups. The t-value is
31.226 with p = 0.000. The difference of the mean scores of the two groups‟ post-test results
is 4.32 in favor of the experimental group. This implies that flipped classroom as an
instructional intervention is more effective in developing students‟ higher order thinking
skills compared with the lecture-discussion approach (Alsowat, 2016). Moreover, it can be
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies 266
Volume 2, Issue 3, 2020
affirmed that critical thinking is greatly influenced by the condition of learning environment;
that students can develop their critical thinking depending on the teaching intervention suited
to them like flipped classroom (Tiruneh, Verburgh, & Elen 2012). The findings also agreed
with Huong, Huy, and Ha (2018) who revealed that flipped classroom approach enhances
students‟ critical thinking in a way that they can take full control of their own learning; they
become more vigilant with the information they acquired. Hence, they become more rational
as they express their own point of view.
With regard to the mean scores of the two groups in reading comprehension posttest,
it can be noted that the control group who were instructed using the lecture-discussion
approach acquired a mean score of 21.0472 with standard deviation of 7.47 whereas the
experimental group who were facilitated under the flipped classroom approach obtained a
mean score of 26.7830 with standard deviation of 8.57. Using the t-test of two-sample
(independent samples) with equal variances assumed, there is a significant difference
between the mean scores of the two groups. The t-value is -35.019 with p = 0.000. The mean
score difference of the two groups‟ post-test results is 5.74 in favor of those students who
were taught under flipped classroom approach. This signifies that associating various
technological tools like flipped classroom develop students reading comprehension skills than
the lecture-discussion approach (Stearns, 2012). Furthermore, it can be stated that flipped
classroom provides students enough time for learning which help them master the skills they
need in reading comprehension. The idea of having the lessons customized can be considered
as an effective way to cover all aspects of reading comprehension that students must possess
(Abaeian & Samadi, 2016). More so, the students in a flipped classroom approach become
more active learners; they acquire and develop their own understanding of the reading
lessons; they make meaning out of the text. Thus, they build connection based on different
perspectives (Arkansas State University, 2017).
5. CONCLUSION
The flipped classroom approach enhances students‟ critical thinking and reading
comprehension levels. This is consistent with the claims forwarded by Alsowat (2016),
Huong, Huy, and Ha (2018), and Abaeian and Samadi (2016). Therefore, providing students
the opportunity to learn at their own pace, allowing them to collaborate with their classmates,
and letting them raise concerns and clarifications in a timely manner can be considered as
effective ways to develop their critical thinking and reading comprehension. Even though the
findings manifested earlier clearly show that students benefit in conventional lecture-
discussion, the flipped classroom approach provides better opportunities for students to
maximize their learning in the ESL classroom especially with regard to the development of
their critical thinking and reading comprehension levels.
Further investigations are needed with regard to the current study. It is important to note
that the length of the intervention for the experimental group and the length of conventional
instruction used in the control group may still be administered using a longer time period in
order to establish if there is a considerable disparity between the effects of the intervention in
contrast to the conventional instruction because, apparently, in this study, the flipped
classroom better enhances reading comprehension levels than the critical thinking levels.
Had the intervention and the conventional instruction been administered twice or thrice the
number of sessions mentioned earlier, results may have distinguished the more effective
pedagogical practice.
Additionally, current results raise an issue as regards the existence or the non-existence of
interdependence between reading comprehension and critical thinking. The researchers,
therefore, encourage scholars to explore and describe, if there is any, the interdependence of
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies 267
Flipped Classroom: Its Effects on ESL Learners’ Critical Thinking and Reading Comprehension Levels
critical thinking and reading comprehension levels in the context of English language
teaching and learning. This recommendation for future research is needed in order to make a
strong link between reading comprehension and critical thinking. Furthermore, it will help
establish a theory on either the causality or the relationship of the two variables.
REFERENCES
Abaeian, H., & Samadi, L. (2016). The effect of flipped classroom on Iranian EFL
learners‟ L2 reading comprehension: Focusing on different proficiency. Journal of
Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(6), 295-304.
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim,
R., & Zhang, Dai. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills
and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4),
1102–1134.
Arifin, M.A., & As‟ad, M.S. (2019). Student Engagement, Collaborative Learning, and
Flipped Classroom as Basis for a Blended Language Learning Environment. The
Asian EFL Journal, 24 (4), pp. 38-44.
Aronson, M., Arfstrom, K., & Tam, K. (2013). Flipped learning in higher
education. Retrieved from Retrieved from https://flippedlearning.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/07/HigherEdWhitePaper-FINAL.pdf
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student, in every
class, every day. Oregon: Courtney Burkholder.
Danker, B. (2015). Using flipped classroom approach to explore deep learning in large
classrooms. IAFOR Journal of Education, 3 (1).
EBSCO (2015). Learning express helps students prepare for the new SAT test. News Center:
Press Release.
Education First (2015). Flipped English learning. How businesses are getting
EDUCASE Learning Initiative, (2012). 7 things you should know about flipped
classrooms. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/resources /2012/2/7-things-
you-should-know-about-flipped-classrooms
Edutopia, (2008). Why integrate technology into curriculum?: The reasons are
many. Retrived from
https://laulima.hawaii.edu/access/content/user/jaydene/ED100/ED100.Article.Why%2
0Integrate%20Technology%20into%20the%20Curriculum.pdf
Hamdan, N., Mcknight, K., Mcknight, P., & Arfstrom, K. (2013). A review of
flipped learning. Flipped Learning Network. Retrieved from
https://flippedlearning.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/07/LitReview_FlippedLearning.p
df
Ha Thi Lan Huong, Nguyen Hoang Doan Huy and Nguyen Ngoc Ha. The Flipped
Classroom: Using Thematic Teaching to Develop Critical Thinking for High School
Students. American Journal of Educational Research. 2018; 6(6):828-835. doi:
10.12691/education-6-6-36
Learning Express (2004) Critical thinking skills success. Leaning Express, LLS: N.Y.
Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenenett, N., & Swift, A. (2013). Student learning and
perceptions in a flipped linear Algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical
Education in Science and Technology. Retrieved October 9, 2017 from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 0020739X .2013.822582
Mislevy R.J., Wilson M.R., Ercikan K., Chudowsky N. (2003) Psychometric Principles in
Student Assessment. In: Kellaghan T., Stufflebeam D.L. (eds) International
Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of
Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht
Peck, K. and Doricot, K., (1994). Realizing the promise of technology: Why use
technology. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/apr94/vol51/num07/Why-Use-Technology¢.aspx
Sarpparaje, M., Jeyasala, V.R., Rathiga, K., & Sasirekha, K. (2018). Flipped Classroom
Approach to make the Best Untilization of ESL Classes at Mepco Schlenk Engineering
College – A Try Out. The Asian ESP Journal, 14 (7.2), pp. 209-228.
Spino, L., and Trego, D. (2015). Strategies for flipping communicative language
classes. Retrieved from http://clear.web.cal.msu.edu/wp-
content/uploads/sites/22/2018/10/CLEAR_Newsletter_Spring_15_FINAL.pdf
Thu Bui, T. (2018). Flipped learning: A Possible Model in the Vietnamese EFL Tertiary
Context. The Asian EFL Journal, 20 (8), 69-75.
Tiruneh D., Verburgh, A., and Elen, J. (2012). Effectiveness of critical thinking
instruction in higher education: A systematic review of intervention studies. Canadian
Center of Science and Education. Higher Education Studies, 4, (1). Retrieved from
www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/hes/article/view/32095
Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin (2019). Access for ELLs interpretive guide
for score reports: Grades K-12, Spring 2020. Retrieved from
https://wida.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/resource/Interpretive-Guide.pdf
AUTHORS' BIOS