Flipped Classroom Research and Trends From Different Fields of Study

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/303317737
Flipped Classroom Research and Trends from Different Fields of Study
Article in International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning · May 2016

DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2274
CITATIONS READS
97 6,250
2 authors:
Zamzami Zainuddin Siti Hajar Halili

The University of Hong Kong University of Malaya
36 PUBLICATIONS 297 CITATIONS 32 PUBLICATIONS 152 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Flipped learning View project
A-maze-ing World of Museum View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Zamzami Zainuddin on 17 May 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
Volume 17, Number 3
April – 2016
Flipped Classroom Research and Trends from

Different Fields of Study
Zamzami Zainuddin1 and Siti Hajar Halili2

1State Islamic University (UIN) of Ar-Raniry, Banda Aceh, Indonesia, 2Department of Curriculum and Instructional
Technology, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur
Abstract
This paper aims to analyse the trends and contents of flipped classroom research based on 20 articles
that report on flipped learning classroom initiatives from 2013–2015. The content analysis was used
as a methodology to investigate methodologies, area of studies, technology tools or online platforms,
the most frequently keywords used and works cited references, impacts for students’ learning, and
flipped classroom challenges. The results of the analysis were interpreted using descriptive analysis,
percentages, and frequencies. This analysis found that various fields were practiced in the flipped
classroom approach, and some technology tools were used as the online platform for its practice.
Analysis of the impacts showed that flipped classroom brought positive impacts toward students’
learning activities such as achievement, motivation, engagement, and interaction. Several issues in
this discussion become implications that can be taken into consideration for future research. Some
challenges found in applying flipped classroom are needed to be addressed by future researchers, such
as suitability of the flipped classroom for poor quality of video lectures and untrained instructor. This
study also becomes an implication for government or policymakers to determine the flipped
classroom as a contemporary model to be implemented in teaching-learning activities for higher
education, even K-12 students.
Keywords: flipped classroom, Bloom’s revised taxonomy, achievement, engagement, motivation,

interaction, content analysis, research trends
Introduction
Technology in the twenty-first century puts instantaneous access to information, and the Internet can
be handily accessed through numerous technology tools such as laptop, computer, and Smartphone
Zainuddin and Halili
(Fu, 2013). Now more than ever, students spend much of their waking time on using some sort of
technology tools; by using this technology, it is possible for them to interact with friends, instructors,
and learning content everywhere, not only in the class but also outside the class through distance
learning (Fisher, 2009). Also, many free learning materials have been provided on Web sites for
learning activities. Richter and McPherson (2012) argued that in today’s digital age, every student can
access many free Internet learning resources such as online video lectures and they can watch these
free contents everywhere and at their convenience. Even more, the use of the traditional learning
approach which focuses on the instructor as the centre of knowledge is irrelevant in today’s digital age
(Wang & Heffernan, 2010). As a solution, traditional classroom activities such as lectures, labs,
homework, and exams can be moved to the Web 2.0 technology and students can study everywhere
outside the classroom (Staker & Horn, 2012). This positive impact of technology growth has
influenced the development of instructional technology in education and replaced the use of the
blackboard with online video lectures (Evans, 2011).
Halili, Razak, and Zainuddin (2014) mentioned that the use of Web 2.0 technology in education can
build professional relationships through collaborating, coaching, and mentoring for social interactions
in sharing ideas. In other words, by using various technological devices, the learners can study in
different locations and times through collaborative distance learning. Therefore, living in a digital age
demands the learners to work independently and collaboratively before coming to the classroom using
various technology tools. New learning instructions that have emerged are now influencing education
positively and producing students’ independent learning. Indeed, technology in education is an ever-
evolving process and demands the students and instructor always update the emerging technology in
education. According to the Horizon Report which focuses on exploring and reporting emerging
technology in education, the flipped classroom has been highlighted as an emerging technology for
higher education which is very important to use at college level (Johnson, Adams Becker, Estrada, &
Freeman, 2014). Therefore, by this reason the authors believe that it is very significant to examine the
contents of current articles that report flipped learning classroom initiatives from the scholarly
journals.
Related Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

In recent years, the flipped classroom has become one of emerging technologies in education and it
can be a standard of teaching-learning practice to foster students’ active learning in higher education
(Hamdan, McKnight, McKnight, & Arfstrom, 2013). The flipped classroom is an approach to teaching
and learning activities where students watch a video lesson outside the class through distance learning
and have hands-on activities in the class. Halili and Zainuddin (2015) note that the flipped classroom
or reverse classroom is an element of blended learning, integrating both face-to-face learning in the
class through group discussion and distance learning outside the class by watching asynchronous
video lessons and online collaboration. Blended learning is simply defined as the activity of teaching
and learning which combined face-to-face physical activities with online learning (Heilesen, 2010;
Lean, Moizer, & Newbery, 2014; Poon, 2014). Blended learning was practiced by mixed face-to-face
and distance teaching and learning or the integration of both distance and face-to-face modalities to
deliver instruction.
314
Flipped classroom is also known as a student-centred approach to learning where the students are
more active than the instructor in the classroom activity. In this case, the instructor acts as a facilitator
to motivate, guide, and give feedback on students’ performance (Sams & Bergmann, 2012). Hence, by
applying the flipped classroom approach to teaching and learning activities, the instructor can move
the traditional lecturer’s talk to video and the students can listen to the lectures anywhere outside of
class. The flipped classroom allows students to watch the video according to their preferred time and
need, and they can study at their own pace; this type of activity also increases students’ collaborative
learning in distance education outside the class. Thus, by flipping the class, the students will not
spend so much time listening to long lectures in the classroom, but will have more time to solve
problems individually or collaboratively through distance learning with peers. Applying flipped
classroom approach also contributes to better understanding of technology use in teaching and
learning activities; students will use various technology media in learning activities independently,
while the lecturer will use various technology media in their teaching practices (Zainuddin & Attaran,
2015).
The study of flipped classrooms was based on the theory of Bloom’s revised taxonomy of cognitive
domain. This taxonomy provides six levels of learning. The explanation is arranged from the lowest
level to the highest level:
1. Remembering: in this stage, the students try to recognize and recall the information they
receive; they also try to understand the basic concepts and principles of the content they have
learned.
2. Understanding: the students try to demonstrate their understanding, interpret the

information and summarize what they have learned.
3. Applying: the students practice what they have learned or apply knowledge to the actual
situation.
4. Analyzing: the students use their critical thinking in solving the problem, debate with friends,
compare the answer with peers, and produce a summary. The students obtain new knowledge
and ideas after implementing critical thinking or a debate in group activities. In this level of
learning, the students also produce creative thinking.
5. Evaluating: assessment or established peer-review knowledge, judge in relational terms; in

this stage, students are evaluating the whole learning concepts and they could evaluate or
make judgment on how far they successfully learned.
6. Creating: the students are able to design, construct and produce something new from what
they have learned (Bloom, 1969).
In implementing flipped classroom, remembering and understanding as the lowest levels of cognitive
domain are practiced outside the class hour (Krathwohl & Anderson, 2010). While in the classroom,
the learners focused on higher forms of cognitive work, including applying, analyzing, evaluating, and
creating. The following Figure 1 illustrates the level of students’ learning in the flipped learning
according to Bloom’s revised taxonomy.
315
Creating
Evaluating
In class
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
At home
Remembering
Figure 1. Bloom’s revised taxonomy in the flipped classroom
With the flipped model, the lower levels are presented before class through recorded lectures and
video. Readings, simulations, and other materials also provide this foundational support for learning
so that in-class time can be spent working on higher levels of learning from application to evaluation.
In flipped classrooms, students go from the lowest level (remembering) to achieve the highest level
(creating). Lankford (2013) mentioned that the flipped classroom focuses on how to support the
learners in achieving a higher level of the taxonomy domain. Additionally, Nederveld and Berge
(2015) added that in flipped learning, classroom activity is spent on application and higher-level of
learning rather than listening to lectures and other lower-level thinking tasks. As shown in Table 1,
implementing flipped learning allows the students to spend more time supporting higher-level
learning tasks such as a group discussion, while lower-level tasks such as knowledge and
comprehension are completed independently outside the class.
Table 1
Comparison Between Traditional Classroom and Flipped Classroom in Achieving Higher Order
Thinking of Bloom’s Taxonomy
Level of learning Traditional classroom Flipped classroom tools

tools
Remembering Face-to-face lecture Pre-recorded lecture,
reading material, and
watching video lectures
independently
Understanding Question and Answer Reflection, peer-to-peer
discussion and
collaboration
Analyzing Homework Classroom activities such as
a group discussion
Applying, Evaluating, Homework or nothing Student projects,
Creating presentations, peer-
evaluation and instructor-
evaluation.
316
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions

The flipped classroom approach is commonly studied and used in various educational institutions
worldwide. Therefore, we intend in this paper to provide more contribution on essential aspects to be
considered when implementing the flipped classroom approach in educational settings. This review
intends to identify the most frequently employed methodologies, area of studies, technology tools,
most commonly keywords used and works the cited authors, impacts of students’ learning, and
challenges of flipping the class through a content analysis of the 20 most influential articles in 2013–
2015. We also hoped that this study will encourage future researchers or policy makers to expand
further their state-of-the-art and theoretical considerations, needed for undertaking their projects and
derived publications in the flipped classroom approach.
Thus, the analysis of this study addresses the following research questions:
1. What methodologies have been frequently employed in flipped classroom research?
2. What areas of flipped classroom studies have been researched?
3. What technology tools or online platforms have been used for implementing the flipped
classroom?
4. What are the most commonly used key words in flipped classroom research?
5. What are the most frequently work cited references in flipped classroom research?
6. What are the impacts of applying the flipped classroom on students’ learning?
7. What are the challenges of applying the flipped classroom approach?
Methodology
Research Design
This study was conducted through content analysis to analyse 20 refereed journal articles on flipped
classroom instruction published from years 2013 to 2015. Content analysis is a research technique
usually applied in social science and the humanities (McMillan, 2000). Creswell (2012) notes that
content analysis is a method which studies the content of written texts, artefacts, pictures, and
recordings. The rationale for using content analysis in this study is that this method is able to evaluate
publishing piles, process of analysis, and interpretation of articles including developing category,
calculating frequencies and interpretation stages were carefully completed (Falkingham & Reeves,
1998). Another rationale is that the use of content analysis may link the data which are related to each
other and analyze the themes that can be read by readers conveniently and efficiently; also, it may be
used by researchers as a reference for potential future research (Bauer, 2000).
The research of content analysis has been conducted by many researchers in the field of educational
technology. For example, Bozkurt et al., (2015) conducted a study to explore the current trends in the
field of distance education research during the period of 2009–2013. They reviewed 861 articles from
317
seven scholarly journals. In this study, they examined the most frequently indicated keywords, chosen
research areas, emphasized theoretical and conceptual backgrounds, employed research designs, used
data collection instruments and data analysis techniques, focused variables, targeted population or
participant groups, cited references, and cited authors. The findings of the study were interpreted
using descriptive analysis (frequencies) and social network analysis. The findings and discussion in
this study could become a basis for potential future research of the flipped classroom approach and
the study in the area of distance education.
Another content analysis was carried out by Özyurt and Özyurt (2015) to examine 69 articles
regarding learning style based individualized adaptive e-learning environments published from 2005
to 2014. The studies were categorized under the title of purpose, nature, method, participant
characteristics, level, data collection tool, learner modeling, employed learning style, subject, and
findings. Data were analyzed by descriptive analysis including frequencies and percentages. The result
showed that in terms of learning styles, more than half of the studies employed Felder-Silverman and
Kolb learning styles.
Thus, the process of content analysis in this study is lengthy and may require the researcher to follow
certain steps to get validation of the study. According to Kohlbacher (2006), content analysis refers to
analysing the material in a step-by-step process. The steps to follow are the following: firstly, content
analysis of the journal articles was conducted by formulating. Secondly, twenty influential or impact
journal articles on the flipped classroom published in 2013, 2014 and 2015 were selected from various
fields of study. Thirdly, categories the main point to be analysed, including methodologies, area of
studies, technology tools, students’ impact, most commonly key words used and work reference
citations, impacts of students’ learning, and challenges of flipping the class. The results of the analysis
were interpreted using descriptive analysis, percentage, and frequencies to interpret the themes and
obtain the most frequently employed categories in flipped class research. Fourthly, data were
analysed and reported systematically beginning with the most frequently employed methodologies,
area of studies, technology tools, most commonly keywords used and works the cited authors,
interpretation of impacts of students’ learning, and challenges of flipping the class. Then, the
researcher concluded and suggested potential future research into the flipped classroom that could be
carried out to contribute to the literature on flipped classroom approach.
Sample
The present study investigated 20 peer-reviewed scholarly articles published from 2013–2015. The 20
journals were retrieved and analyzed using the following rationales:
 A specific focus on flipped classroom research
 Refereed journals that were indexed by prominent databases (Social Sciences Citation Index
(SSCI)/ Thomson Reuters and Scopus)
 A current publication in years 2013, 2014 and 2015
 Containing various field of studies
318
 The 20 journals were accessed and found through electronic databases such as ScienceDirect
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/), SpringerLink (http://www.springer.com/gp/), and Tailor &
Francis Online (http://www.tandfonline.com/).
Ten articles were selected and reviewed from professional journals and published in the Social
Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), namely: The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning (IRROD), Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), The
Internet and Higher Education (I&HE), Computers & Education (C&E), Journal of Nursing
Education (JNE), BMC Medical Education, Journal of Sociology (JS), Computer Assisted Language
Learning (CALL), and Educational and Psychological Measurement (EPM). The study also examined
10 articles selected from the Scopus® database: Advances in physiology education (APE), American
Journal of Pharmaceutical Education (AJPE), The Journal of Negro Education (JNE), International
Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology (IJMEST), International Review of
Economics Education (IREE), TechTrends, PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in
Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, Nurse Education in Practice (NEP), Journal of Political
Science Education (JPSE) and Academic Medicine (AM).
There were seven journals published in 2013, nine journals published in 2014 and four journals
published in 2015 (see Appendix).
Findings and Discussion
In this study, 20 journals were examined during the three years of publication (2013–2015). The
descriptive analysis in the form of percentage and frequency was used in analyzing the data.
Discussion was carried out based on the percentages reported systematically beginning with the most
frequently employed methodologies, area of studies, technology tools, most commonly keywords used
and works the cited authors, impacts of students’ learning, and challenges of flipping the class. From
the articles reviewed, the research findings of this study are elaborated as follows.
Research Methodologies Employed in Flipped Classroom Research

Various methodologies were employed in flipped classroom research from 20 journals examined. The
first analysis explored the research question of what methodologies have been frequently employed in
flipped classroom research. This analysis found that the most frequently used methodologies in
flipped classroom research were the mixed-method approach (quantitative and qualitative), followed
by the quantitative approach. This analysis began with the finding which used multiple instruments to
collect rich information and identify effective flipped learning practices (e.g., Chen, Wang, & Chen,
2014; Roach, 2014; Kong, 2014; Davies, Dean, & Ball, 2013; Enfield, 2013; Galway, Corbett, Takaro,
Tairyan, & Frank, 2014; Hung, 2015; Kim, Kim, Khera, & Getman, 2014; McGivney-Burelle & Xue,
2013; McLaughlin et al., 2013; Simpson & Richards, 2015; Talley & Scherer, 2013). The instruments
used in collecting the data were mainly tests, questionnaires, documents, and interviews. For example,
McLaughlin et al. (2013) used survey and open-ended text comments to collect data. Kim et al. (2014)
also collected data from diverse sources including surveys, interviews, instructor reflections, and
documents (e.g., meeting minutes, course syllabi, and student outcomes).
Another most frequently used method was quantitative approaches and most research testing the
effectiveness of the flipped classroom studied and identified students’ perceptions through survey.
319
The quantitative research of the flipped classroom has been conducted by numerous researchers (e.g.,
Baepler, Walker, & Driessen, 2014; Chen & Summers, 2015; Love, Hodge, Grandgenett, & Swift, 2014;
McLaughlin et al., 2014; Missildine, Fountain, Summers, & Gosselin, 2013; Tune, Sturek, & Basile,
2013; Touchton, 2015; Warner, Koufteros, & Verghese, 2014. In collecting the data, Beapler et al.
(2014) for example, used experimental research design to examine active learning between a flipped
classroom and a traditional classroom; they used a post test-only non-equivalent groups design
involving undergraduate students in three sections of a general chemistry course. In addition, Tune et
al. (2013) used a survey to determine students’ perspectives regarding the flipped classroom model at
the end of the course. However, in this analysis, the authors did not find a qualitative approach
employed such as using a single instrument interview, focus group discussion, or observation. The
following two figures (Figures 2 and 3) show the percentage composition of research methods in
flipped classroom research from 20 selected articles journal published in 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Figure 2. Percentage of research methods.
According to the methodology used in 2013, there were five journals that used mixed-method and
three journals that employed quantitative methods. Likewise, in 2014, there were five journals that
used the mixed-method approach and three journals that were designed by the quantitative approach.
While in 2015, there were two journals published using quantitative methods and two journals that
used the mixed-method approach. Figure 3 summarizes the frequency of research methods used in
each year of publication.
320
Figure 3. Frequency of research methods in each year.
In terms of participants or samples, all participants in this study were students from different levels of
study. The majority of participants were undergraduate students or first year college students (e.g.,
McGivney-Burelle & Xue, 2013; Touchton, 2015; Talley & Scherer, 2013; Simpson & Richards, 2015;
Enfield, 2013; Davies et al., 2013; Beapler et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2014; Hung, 2015; Roach, 2014;
Mclaughlin et al., 2013). The second most participants were graduate students (e.g., Chen et al., 2014,
Galway et al., 2014; Tune et al., 2013; Mclaughlin et al., 2013). The third were college students without
detailed information whether undergraduate or graduate level (e.g. Warner et al., 2014; Love et al.,
2014; Missildine et al., 2013). Then, only a study by Kong (2014) used students as participants without
having specified from which level of education they were enrolled.
Furthermore, in terms of data collection (instruments), Figure 4 shows that the most instruments
used in the flipped classroom research was survey (28%), followed by testing course (28%), interview
(14%), observation (7%), existing test score (5%), document analysis (5%), and analysis of logs system
(2%).
321
Figure 4. Data collection (instruments).
Area of Studies in the Flipped Classroom

Besides the different methodologies used in flipped classroom research, there were many areas of
study where the flipped classroom had been implemented during the three years. The analysis of this
explored the research question “What areas of flipped classroom studies have been researched?” This
study reported that the flipped classroom had been implemented in various areas of study. Morgan
(2014) mentioned that many instructors from different fields of study in the United States of America
(USA) tried to conduct experiments study in using the flipped classroom approach. Sams and
Bergmann (2012) also showed that flipped classroom instruction is not only applied in chemistry and
math classes, but also in all areas of study.
Various studies in flipped classroom in 2013, 2014 and 2015 showed different fields of studies,
including science and social courses, such as information systems (Davies et al., 2013), chemistry
(Baepler et al., 2014), algebra (Love et al., 2014), economics (Roach, 2014), engineering, sociology and
humanities (Kim et al., 2014), integrated humanities (Kong, 2014), physiology (Talley & Scherer,
2013), statistics (Touchton, 2015), public health (Simpson & Richards, 2015), calculus (McGivney-
Burelle & Xue, 2013), science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM; McLaughlin et al.,
2014), business (Warner et al., 2014), and English language (Hung, 2015).
Technology Tools or Online Platforms Used in the Flipped Classroom

Diverse technology tools or online platforms have also been used in flipped classroom research. Hence,
this section will answer the research question three “What technology tools or online platforms have
been used for implementing the flipped classroom?” In applying the flipped classroom approach,
there are various technology tools such as Wikis and Blogs can be employed to interact virtually
outside the class and used to work collaboratively to solve problems or exchange ideas. These tools
allow the users to share text, pictures, and videos with other users during distance learning (Pempek,
Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009). This study shows that various technology tools or online platforms
have been used by students to access online video or contents before coming to class. The students
also used these platform tools to study through online collaboration outside the class. Staker and
Horn (2012) mentioned that the activity of teaching and learning is not only limited to behind the
classroom wall, but can also take place outside the class. Therefore, by using various technology media
or online platforms, students can study virtually, watch learning subjects for free all the time and
interact with students and instructors outside of the class.
Here, we share some examples of different online platforms used in the flipped classroom practice.
Love et al. (2014) reported that the screencasts were developed specifically in a flipped linear algebra
course and the instructor created the presentations using the LaTeX beamer package. Roach (2014)
used a Blog as online platform to share the video lectures; students had to access and watch one video
per week that was available on a Blog. Hung (2015) used a WebQuest to establish students’ active
learning in and English language class. Missildine et al. (2013) reported that 16 master’s-prepared
faculty members taught two courses via interactive television on three campuses. While Kim et al.
(2014) reported that students in a flipped classroom watched video lectures on YouTube and
collaborated on Google Docs and Google Hangout. Table 2 summarizes various technological tools or
online platforms have been employed in flipped classroom research.
322
Table 2
Technological Tools or Online Platforms in Flipped Classroom Research (2013–2015)
Source: (author, year) Technology tools or Online Platforms

Davies et al. (2013) MyITLab videos and software simulation
McLaughlin et al. (2013) Echo360 Classroom Capture (Echo360 Inc.,

Dulles, VA), the Sakai Website, Integrated
Learning Accelerator Modules (ILAM).
Talley and Scherer (2013) Recorded tools, webcam, laptop, tablet device, or
mobile phone. Blackboard® Journal page.
Love et al. (2014) Online screencasts and LaTeX beamer package.
Roach (2014) Blog, online software (http:// ed.ted.com), video

sources adopted from: Khan Academy,
Freakonomics; NPR: Planet Money; PBS: Idea
Channel; Wall Street Journal: Opinion Journal.
Kim et al. (2014) YouTube video, Blackboard LMS , Google Docs,
and, Dropbox, Google Hangout.
Baepler et al. (2014) A video message board, microphones, large-screen

monitors, whiteboards, and wireless.
Kong (2014) A tablet PC, Online pre-lesson learning and a

Web-based word processor (Google Docs).
Missildine et al. (2013) Interactive television.
Enfield (2013) Course Website

(http://www.jacobenfield.com/allThingsWeb)
Galway et al. (2014) Course Website (http://www.NextGenU.org)
Hung (2015) WebQuest
McGivney-Burelle and Xue The TI-89 graphing calculator and WeBWork (an
(2013) online homework system), Maple Worksheets,
mathlets, videos, clickers, and e-textbooks.
Keywords Indicated
Besides title and abstract, keywords play a crucial role in journal publication and they have a great
impact on user searches or basic information on the Internet search engine (Day & Gastel, 2012). The
researcher needs to choose appropriate keywords for their journal articles for indexing purposes, well-
chosen keywords enable their articles to be more rapidly identified and cited by others. Otherwise,
readers would not be able to find or cite their articles without using relevant keywords.
Through this analysis, the readers would know the most commonly used keywords in 20 flipped
classroom article journals which reflected the research paper topic. In this study, the researchers
found a total of 81 keywords from the analysis of 20 selected articles. This analysis investigated the
research question four, which it is “What are the most commonly used key words in the flipped
classroom research?”
323
From 81 keywords identified in 20 journals, seven keywords most frequently appeared in several
articles and flipped classroom was used as the main keyword, followed by active learning, blended
learning, flipped learning, technology integration, pedagogical issues and e-learning. Figure 5
summarizes the most commonly used keywords in flipped classroom research.
Figure 5. The most commonly used keywords in the flipped learning research publication.
The Most Frequently Cited References
Flipped classroom is an instructional strategy in education and becomes one of the most studied in
recent years. Therefore, through this analysis, we found the most cited reference by researchers
regarding the flipped classroom study. This part will analyze the trends of citation in the flipped
classroom research and it will explore the research question “What are the most frequently cited
references in the flipped classroom research?”
The researchers found a total of 605 references from 20 selected articles of flipped classrooms and the
most highly cited reference was Bergmann and Sams (2012) from a book entitled “Flip Your
Classroom, Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day”, a total of citation was eight times. From
this result, we assume that high citation was influenced by their roles and contribution of the pioneers
of the flipped class movement after successfully flipping their class. According to Halili and
Zainuddin (2015), Jonathan Bergman and Aaron Sams are high school chemistry teachers in Colorado,
United States and they began implementing the flipped classroom in 2007 by video-recording
learning materials and sharing them with students to be learned at home.
Likewise, the article by Lage, Platt and Treglia (2000) was also cited eight times in 20 flipped
classroom articles, their article has been published seven years before the flipped classroom model
was popularized by Bergman and Sams in 2007. Lage, Platt, and Treglia in a paper entitled “Inverting
the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment” discussed their research
on flipped classrooms at the college level which focused on two college economics courses. However,
324
according to a Google scholar (https://scholar.google.com/) report in April 2016, Bergmann and

Sams’ book (2012) has more citations with 864 times compared to Lage et al. (2000) with the citation
of 797 times. The following Table 3 summarizes the trends of references that have been cited at least 5
times.
Table 3
The References List of Most Cited Studies
Rank Frequency References
1 8 Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom:

Reach every student in every class every day.
Washington, DC: Internal Society for Technology in
Education.
1 8 Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting

the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning
environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1),
30-43.
2 5 Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011).

Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics
class. Science, 332(6031), 862-864.
2 5 Berrett, D. (2012). How ‘flipping’ the classroom can

improve the traditional lecture. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 12, 1-14.
2 5 Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted

classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task
orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-
193.
2 5 Baker, J. W. (2000). The “classroom flip”: Using web

course management tools to become the guide by the side.
11th International Conference on College Teaching and
Learning, (pp. 9-17). Jacksonville, Florida, United States.
Impacts on Students’ Learning
In addition, several studies showed that the flipped classroom had positive impacts on teaching and
learning practice. The analysis of this explored the research question “What are the impacts of
applying the flipped classroom for students’ learning?” In this study, the researchers found a number
of positive impacts in flipped learning practice: students’ achievement, students’ motivation, students’
engagement, and students’ interaction.
Students’ achievement. Achievement tests can provide an accurate snapshot of how well
students are performing on various subjects. The structure of innovative learning environment and
pedagogical strategy is the most pivotal factor that will increase student achievement in learning
325
activities (Huang & Chiu, 2015). Therefore, the main goal of the emergence of the flipped classroom in
education is to enhance student learning and achievement by focusing class time activities on student
understanding and hands-on activities rather than on lecture. Some researchers have implemented
the flipped classroom model to examine students’ achievement in learning various subjects. The
following reports showed that the flipped classroom model has effectively supported students’
learning achievements with several motives.
Previous studies reported that students in flipped classrooms could obtain similar high examination
scores when the class was flipped and that they could prepare for the subject before coming to class
(Galway et al., 2014). Davies et al. (2013) conducted a study to explore how the use of technology in
the flipped classroom might be utilized to effectively promote students’ achievement. The findings
showed that using technology was effective and scalable in a flipped classroom, and students’ post-test
scores in a flipped classroom improved compared to their pre-test scores. In term of pre-test and post-
test comparison achievement, other studies also reported in which students statistically improved
their learning and mastering of the subject in a post-test. In other words, the students have shown
that they can understand the learning content and obtain a high score in the test or exam (Enfield,
2013; Kong, 2014; Talley & Scherer, 2013).
Furthermore, applying flipped classroom model is more effective compared to traditional classroom in
term of students’ achievement. Beapler et al. (2014) released the results of their research showing that
students’ outcomes in a flipped classroom were significantly better than those in a conventional
classroom or control class, and students’ perceptions of the learning environment were also improved.
Hung (2015) in her study reported that the structured and semi-structured flip lessons were more
effective instructional designs than the non-flip lessons (flip > semi-flip, flip > non-flip, p < .05) in
teaching the English language. In the same manner, McGivney-Burelle and Xue (2013) also noticed
that flipping pedagogy in calculus was effective and worth the significant investment of faculty time
and effort compared to traditional class.
Formative assessment was also one of the reasons that students improved their learning achievements.
The instructor always gave feedback to facilitate students’ improvement. Kim et al. (2014) noted that
through formative assessment in the flipped classroom, the instructor could evaluate students’
improvement in their learning activities while the students could understand what needed to be done
to overcome their deficiencies in learning. Additionally, according to report by McGivney-Burelle and
Xue (2013), students’ ability to pause and re-watch the videos at any time may affect students’
effective learning; they also enable students to take notes from the videos at their own pace. The
following Table 4 summarizes students’ effective learning achievements in flipped classroom research.
Table 4
Students’ Achievement
Author(s) and year Impacts
Davies et al. (2013) Achievement of most students was significantly

improved compared to the traditional class.
Tune et al. (2013) By having a quiz and class meeting, students’
326
performance was improved especially in the exam.
Missildine et al. (2013) Flipped classroom can improve students’ performance.
Enfield (2013) Effective in helping students learn the content of

learning.
Talley and Scherer Improved students’ average course grades when

(2013) compared to a previous semester without flipping.
McGivney-Burelle and Flipping pedagogy in calculus was effective and worth

Xue (2013) the significant investment of faculty time and effort
compared to traditional class.
Baepler et al. (2014) Experimental class with a flipped classroom was more
effective and improved students’ learning compared to a
conventional or control class.
Kim et al. (2014) Students felt the formative assessment through which
they could improve their weaknesses in mastering the
content very helpful.
Galway et al. (2014) Students achieved similar high examination scores.
McLaughlin et al. (2014) The flipped classroom has improved students’ exam
performance.
Hung (2015) The structured and semi-structured flip lessons were

more effective instructional designs than the non-flip
lessons.
Student’s motivation. Besides students’ achievement or effective learning, students’

motivation also played a significant role in implementing the flipped classroom. Motivation is an
inner power that pushes humans to take an action or move toward a goal (Harmon-Jones, Harmon-
Jones, & Price, 2013). Students’ motivation is defined as a spirit, initiative, and willingness of students
to attend and learn material (Cole, Field, & Harris, 2004). In education, motivation is acknowledged
as one of the most crucial elements which support students’ performance and achievement.
According to self-determination theory, students’ motivation is distinguished into two main types:
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Abeysekeraa & Dawson, 2015). Intrinsic motivation refers to those
actions that individuals engage in as they are inherently interesting, fun, exciting, and enjoyable, while
extrinsic motivation refers to individuals engaging in actions because they lead to reward or to avoid
punishment (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Likewise, this analysis showed that the flipped
classroom has promoted students’ empowerment, development, and ability to learn independently or
at their own pace (McLaughlin et al., 2013; Galway et al., 2014).
Even more, the flipped classroom’s success relies upon students undertaking substantial out-of-class
work—and being motivated to do so independently (Kim et al., 2014). Many studies showed that the
impact of applying the flipped classroom was to increase students’ motivation in relation to learning
activities. For example, Davies et al. (2013) mentioned that students were able to learn based on
simulated learning and that they were motivated to learn at their own pace; they also noted that the
students wished to recommend the flipped classroom to their other friends.
327
The flipped classroom also increases self-perceived knowledge or self-efficacy in independent learning
(Galway et al., 2014; Enfield, 2013). McLaughlin et al. (2014) mentioned that the strategy of the
flipped learning approach will foster students’ motivation in further learning. Their study indicated
that the ILAM LMS (Integrated Learning Accelerator Modules) allowed students to learn at their own
pace outside the class. In terms of in independent learning, McGivney-Burelle and Xue (2013) also
noted that students are able to work at their own pace in class. Therefore, it can be implied that
learning environments created by the flipped classroom approach are likely to satisfy students’ needs
for competence, autonomy, and relatedness and, thus, entice greater levels of intrinsic motivation.
The following Table 5 summarizes students’ motivation in flipped classroom research.
Table 5
Students’ Motivation
Author(s) Impacts
Davies et al. (2013) Students were able to learn based on

simulated learning, they were motivated to
learn at their own pace, and recommended
flipped learning to other friends.
Enfield (2013) The flipped classroom can improve students’

self-efficacy in independent learning.
Kim et al. (2014) Students undertake substantial out-of-class

work—and are motivated to do so
independently.
Galway et al. (2014) Increase in self-perceived knowledge.
McLaughlin et al. (2014) The strategy of flipped learning approach will

foster students’ motivation in further
learning.
McGivney-Burelle and Xue (2013) Students are able to work at their own pace in
class.
Students’ engagement. The next positive impact is enhancing students’ engagement. All
researchers probably agree that the aim of flipped learning is to establish students’ engagement with
active learning. Students’ engagement refers to students’ active learning or students’ desire to actively
participate in routine class activity such as submitting homework, listening to the topic, working on
what the instructor asks them to do, and actively attending the class (Yang & Cheng, 2014). Likewise,
Zepke, Leach and Butler (2009) mentioned that students’ engagement resulted from students’
motivation. The term students’ engagement is frequently used for students’ active learning or
students’ desire to actively participate in routine class activity such as submitting homework, listening
to the topic, working on what the instructor asks to do, and actively attending the class (Delialioglu,
2012).
Several studies showed that students had engaged in the flipped classroom. Kim et al. (2014) reported
that students were able to prepare for in-class activities by watching and exploring on-line learning
materials (e.g., online video lectures) before coming to class. Students felt confident when learning in
328
the class because they had already prepared the lesson before coming to class. Talley and Scherer
(2013) also reported that students could confidently produce a summary of the biological process in
their own words by implementing the flipped classroom and they could be active in the class. Other
researchers also mentioned students’ confidence—by interacting with asynchronous video lectures
outside the class, they could be more confident and prepared when participating in discussions in the
class (Kim et al., 2014).
Students can enhance their engagement in classroom activity, participate in discussions, exchange
ideas, and solve problems with their peers (McLaughlin et al., 2013). The use of the flipped classroom
also promotes students’ empowerment, development, engagement, and critical thinking. The study
conducted by Chen et al. (2014) reported that students were satisfied with the class meeting, their
attendance of the class was improved, and they had opportunities for active learning rather than
listening to long lectures. He also mentioned that the number of students who came to class in the
flipped classroom (in 2013) was 110, which was better than the previous year (in 2012) when the class
was not flipped and the number of students was 88. Hung (2015) reported that the students engage
the learning environment and engaged in the learning process. McLaughlin et al. (2014) also reported
that students participated and engaged in discussions in class, and they were confident in their ability
to apply the knowledge. Additionally, McGivney-Burelle and Xue (2013) also noted that students
enjoyed having the instructor available in class to help them while they worked on problems.
From all findings, it showed that the flipped classroom has been successfully practiced to better
engage students in learning various subjects. In contrast, the class without flipping or traditional class
tends to produce disengaged learning environment because this conventional learning model has
some problems. For example, teaching and learning activities only focus on text books and lectures,
and students tend to be disengaged in active learning because they have a lack of time to express their
abilities or performances in class. Traditional learning tends to produce a low level of student
engagement, and students often pay less attention to the subjects they learn (Carini, Kuh, & Klein,
2006). Nguyen (2010) also noted that traditional class activities also focus on textbooks and lecture
talks; students tend to be disengaged in their learning activity. Hence, students who are disengaged in
learning will show some negative habits such as boredom, restlessness, and disruptive behavior
(Freeman et al., 2007). The following Table 6 summarizes students’ engagement in flipped classroom
research.
Table 6
Students’ Engagement
Authors and year Impacts
McLaughlin et al. (2013) Students can enhance their engagement

in classroom activity, participate in
discussions, exchange ideas, and solve
problems with peers.
329
Chen et al. (2014) Students were satisfied with the class

activities, their attendance improved,
and they had more opportunities for
active learning.
Talley and Scherer (2013) Students can confidently produce a

summary of the biological process in
their own words.
Missildine et al. (2013) Students have engaged in active

learning.
Kim et al. (2014) By interacting with asynchronous video
lectures outside the class, students were
more confident and prepared while
discussing in the class.
McLaughlin et al. (2014) Students participated and engaged in

discussions in class and improved high
level of confident to apply their
knowledge.
Hung (2015) Students engage the learning

environment and engaged in the
learning process.
Students’ interaction. Students’ interaction is the other positive impact in a flipped

classroom environment either in the classroom or in distance learning. Students’ interaction refers to
students’ communication with all the elements in the learning environment including the instructor,
students, and content (Woo & Reeves, 2007). It proves that students’ social interaction in technology
learning environment is more effective than that in traditional classroom without using technology;
students in traditional classroom only interact physically in the classroom but not outside class hours
(Wang, 2013). It can be assumed that students’ social interactions will increase when technology
media is integrated in teaching-learning activities. Technology use will indeed help students interact
easily with all communities both inside and outside the class.
According to Moore (1989), three fundamental interactions should be established for successful
teaching-learning with technology-based learning: student-content interaction, student-teacher
interaction and student-student interaction. Hillman, Willis, and Gunawardena (1994) suggested
student-interface interaction or interaction with technology tools as the fourth interaction to complete
Moore’s concept. All these interactions are very significant elements to apply in the flipped classroom
approach in which technology is used as media to relearn and interact outside the classroom. Roach
(2014) reported in his research that the students responded positively about flipping the classroom
because the instruction helped them to collaborate with each other to solve problems. The flipped
classroom enabled students to build a learning community and exchange ideas to solve problems (Kim
et al., 2014). Another reported that it could build the dialogue inside the class or virtually through
distance learning outside the class hours (McLaughlin et al., 2013).
Love et al. (2014) compared the effectiveness of two teaching methods (a traditional lecture and a
flipped style) in a sophomore-level linear algebra course at a mid-sized metropolitan university. The
findings showed that the students had a positive perception of the flipped classroom according to their
experience of studying for one semester. It was mentioned that students had more opportunities to
330
interact with one another and this helped them learn from other students. Missildine et al. (2013)
reported that the blending of new technology and the traditional classroom had established students’
interactive learning, particularly outside the class through LMS. Another study mentioned that
students can enrich the dialogue with their friends both inside and outside the class because the
activity of teaching-learning in a flipped classroom is not just limited to behind the classroom wall
(McLaughlin et al., 2013). Also, Hung (2015) reported that 75 students (64%) in flipped learning class
increased their interactions with the instructor and classmates. The following Table 7 summarizes
students’ interaction in flipped classroom research.
Table 7
Students’ Interaction
Authors Impacts
Love et al. (2014) Students had more opportunities to

collaborate with each other.
Roach (2014) The instruction helped them to work

together in a group interactively to
solve problems.
Missildine et al. (2013) The blending of new technology and

the traditional classroom has
established interactive learning.
Kim et al. (2014) Flipped classroom enables students to

build a learning community and
exchange ideas to solve problems.
McLaughlin et al. (2013) Students can enrich the dialogue with

their friends both inside and outside
the class because the activity of
teaching-learning in a flipped
classroom is not only limited to behind
the classroom wall.
Chen et al. (2014) Flipped learning has increased

students’ interactions and enhanced
interactions between all parties.
Hung (2015) Participants in flipped learning

approach were enhanced interaction
with the instructor and classmates.
Challenges in the flipped classroom approach. On the other hand, Kim et al. (2014)
reported that there was no evidence that flipped learning had improved students’ grades. They
mentioned that there were some limitations and required future research into areas such as
achievement scores, technology, and how pedagogy must be integrated. Chen et al., (2014) also
reported that many students had difficulty adapting to the flipped classroom because of the new
approach. Most of the part-time students also mentioned that the course was very heavy and they did
not have time to watch the video lesson outside the class. Besides challenging students, instructors
331
also faced some problems in practicing flipped learning, as more time would be spent on designing
good content to ensure students were motivated to watch the lecture before coming to class. Milman
(2012) noted that poor quality of video usually became a common problem in flipped classroom
practice. Enfield (2013) also stressed that if the content and design of a video lecture is unattractive,
the students will find it tedious to watch outside the class.
Discussion, Conclusion, and Future Implications

This study aims to analyse the trends and contents of flipped classroom research based on 20 articles
that report on flipped learning classroom initiatives in 2013–2015. It was found that research into the
flipped classroom employed different methodologies, area of studies, technology tools or online
platforms, the most frequently keywords used and works cited references, impacts for students’
learning, and flipped classroom challenges. The flipped classroom also benefited students
academically and motivationally, the students could study at their own paces and feel confident during
interactive learning activities in the class. In other words, this learning instruction has contributed to
students’ learning achievement, motivation, engagement, and interaction.
The findings of this study are also in coherence with the theory of Bloom’s revised taxonomy for
cognitive domain (Bloom, 1969). This means that this study has a great implication on students’
learning where they were able do the lower levels of cognitive work (gaining knowledge and
comprehension) at home or outside of class, and focus on the higher forms of cognitive work
(application, analysis, synthesis, or evaluation) in class by hands-on activities or practice. This model
contrasts from the traditional model in which the students practiced the lowest level of remembering
and understanding in the classroom by listening to instructor’s talk, while other levels were practiced
outside the class such as doing homework or nothing.
Several issues in this discussion become implications that can be taken into consideration for future
research. Some challenges found in applying the flipped classroom are needed to be addressed by
future researchers, such as suitability of the flipped classroom for poor quality of video lectures and
untrained instructors. Therefore, this study should be continued and developed in future research to
fill in the literature on the flipped classroom approach. In terms of online video lectures, flipped
learning videos must encourage students to interact as well as watch. In designing online video, it may
include several elements such as animation, cartoon, and music to attract students’ attention to watch
it.
Although the video and online platforms are important tools in the flipped classroom practice, the
instructor may not ignore other significant factors which influence students’ successful learning such
as students’ interaction, motivation, and engagement. It may also look more specifically on a variety of
pedagogical strategies and designs such as specific flipped learning strategy and learner types or
learning styles. We believe that the instructor’s teaching strategy such as the flipped classroom is
always integrated and synchronized with students’ learning styles. Therefore, the instructor may
develop various strategies in flipping the class by adjusting with students’ learning styles without
ignoring any content or syllabus. We also believe that all domains of students’ learning styles can be
applied in the flipped classroom practice, which leads to active, effective learning and students’ higher
order thinking.
332
In the same manner, future studies may not only focus on outside class activities, but also in-class
activities. The in-class activities are doubly important for students’ hands-on activities, group
discussion, or inquiry based learning in order to construct their critical and creative thinking.
Additionally, we need studies examining the flipped learning processes in informal and non-formal
learning environments as well as for part-time students who have limited time to prepare the contents
outside the class. Hence, future flipped learning is not only practiced in higher education or college
level, but also for K–12 environments. We believe that if the flipped classroom is practiced correctly
and thoughtfully, it will be an excellent instructional model which can promote students higher forms
of cognitive domains which is incoherence with the theory of Bloom’s revised taxonomy for cognitive
domain.
We also recommend that future flipped classroom studies may use a variety of research designs such
as experimental research, case study, ethnography, and indeed design and developmental research
(DDR) or design based research (DBR). The systematic study of DDR research will produce a variety
of models, techniques, and modules of flipped classroom practices. Even more, future studies of
flipped classrooms may apply for not only science studies, but also social studies such as foreign
language classes, physical education, English, history, drama classes, and humanities. A number of
different online platforms or learning management systems (LMSs) may be used in applying the
future flipped classroom approach; those tools can be used to share the content (video lectures) and
establish interaction among students and between students and instructor outside the class. Web 3.0
also can be integrated in the future flipped classroom and it will have potential and useful to produce a
new model of flipped classroom.
In summary, this study has clearly demonstrated that the application of flipped learning has altered
the culture of students’ learning from a lecturer-centered to student-centered, with more class
activities belonging to students. This research has implications for students’ learning activities; the
students learned through hands-on and project-based learning activities. With limited time dedicated
to the lectures, students have more occasions to practice the contents with peers. The results of this
study have contributed to better understanding of technology use in teaching-learning activities. For
government or policymakers, they should determine the flipped classroom as a contemporary model
to be implemented in teaching-learning activities for higher education and even K–12 students.
Finally, perhaps the findings and discussion of this study will contribute to deeper understanding of
future research in the flipped classroom area.
Reference
Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2014). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom:
Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development,
34(1), 1-14. doi:10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
Baepler, P., Walker, J., & Driessen, M. (2014). It's not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and
efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227-236.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006
Bauer, M. W. (2000). Classical content analysis: A review. In M. W. Bauer & G. Gaskell (Eds.),
Qualitative researching with text, image and sounds (pp. 131–151). London, UK: Sage.
333
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every
day. Washington, DC: Internal Society for Technology in Education.
Bloom, B. S. (1969). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals:

By a committee of college and university examiners: Handbook 1.David McKay.
Bozkurt, A., Akgun-Ozbek, E., Yilmazel, S., Erdogdu, E., Ucar, H., Guler, E., … Aydin, C. H. (2015).
Trends in distance education research: A content analysis of journals 2009–2013. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1), 330–363.
Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing
the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32. doi: 10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9
Chen, H. L., & Summers, K. L. (2015). Developing, using, and interacting in the flipped learning
movement: Gaps among subject areas. The International Review of Research in Open and
Distributed Learning, 16(3), 41–63.
Chen, Y., Wang, Y., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model
instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16–27. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.004
Coghill, A. M., & Garson, L. R. (2006). The ACS style guide. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
and the American Chemical Society.
Cole, M. S., Feild, H. S., & Harris, S. G. (2004). Student learning motivation and psychological
hardiness: Interactive effects on students' reactions to a management class. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 64-85. doi:10.5465/amle.2004.12436819
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research (4rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology
integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580. doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9305-6
Day, R., & Gastel, B. (2012). How to write and publish a scientific paper. Cambridge University
Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY:
University of Rochester Press.
Delialioglu, Ö. (2012). Student engagement in blended learning environments with lecture-based

and problem-based instructional approaches. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3),
310–322.
Enfield, J. (2013). Looking at the Impact of the Flipped Classroom Model of Instruction on
Undergraduate Multimedia Students at CSUN. TechTrends TECHTRENDS TECH TRENDS,
57(6), 14-27. doi:10.1007/s11528-013-0698-1
334
Evans, D. (2011, October 28). Turning lessons upside down. The Times Educational Supplement, p.
4.
Falkingham, L. T. & Reeves, R. (1998). Context analysis a technique for analysing research in a field,
applied to literature on the management of R and D at the section level. Scientometrics,
42(2), 97–120. doi: 10.1007/bf02458351
Fisher, D. (2009). The Use of Instructional Time in the Typical High School Classroom. The
Educational Forum, 73(2), 168-176. doi:10.1080/00131720902739650
Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., ... Wenderoth, M. P.
(2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology. CBE Life
Sciences Education, 6(2), 132–139. doi: 10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194
Fu, J. S. (2013). ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International
Journal of Education & Development using Information & Communication
Technology, 9(1), 112–125.
Galway, L. P., Corbett, K. K., Takaro, T. K., Tairyan, K., & Frank, E. (2014). A novel integration of
online and flipped classroom instructional models in public health higher education. BMC
Medical Education BMC Med Educ, 14(1), 181. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-14-181
Halili, S. H., & Zainuddin, Z. (2015). Flipping the classroom: What we know and what we don't. The
Online Journal of Distance Education and e‐Learning, 3(1), 28–35.
Halili, S. H., Abdul Razak, R., & Zainuddin, Z. (2014). Enhancing collaborative learning in flipped
classroom. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 9(7), 147–149.
Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013). The flipped learning model: A
white paper based on the literature review titled “A Review of Flipped Learning.” Arlington,
VA: Flipped Learning Network.
Harmon-Jones, E., Harmon-Jones, C., & Price, T. F. (2013). What is approach motivation? Emotion
Review, 5(3), 291–295. doi: 10.1177/1754073913477509
Heilesen, S. B. (2010). What is the academic efficacy of podcasting? Computers & Education, 55(3),
1063–1068. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.002
Hillman, D. C., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1994). Learner‐interface interaction in distance
education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American
Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42. doi: 10.1080/08923649409526853
Huang, Y. M., & Chiu, P. S. (2015). The effectiveness of the meaningful learning-based evaluation for
different achieving students in a ubiquitous learning context. Computers & Education, 87,
243–253. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.009
335
Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active
learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81–96. doi:
10.1080/09588221.2014.967701
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC horizon report: 2014
Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms
in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher
Education, 22, 37-50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003
Kohlbacher, F. (2006). The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum:
Qualitative Social Research, 7(1).
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain
knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom
strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160–173. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the Revision of Bloom's
Taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 64-65. doi:10.1080/00461520903433562
Lankford, L. (2013, January 24). Isn't the flipped classroom just blended learning? [Blog post]
Retrieved from https://ileighanne.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/isnt-the-flipped-classroom-
just-blended-learning/
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an
inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43. doi:
10.1080/00220480009596759
Lean, J., Moizer, J., & Newbery, R. (2014). Enhancing the impact of online simulations through
blended learning: A critical incident approach. Education+ Training, 56(2/3), 8–8. doi;
10.1108/et-01-2013-0007
Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. W. (2014). Student learning and perceptions in a
flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science
and Technology, 45(3), 317–324. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2013.822582
McGivney-Burelle, J., & Xue, F. (2013). Flipping calculus. Primus, 23(5), 477–486. doi:
10.1080/10511970.2012.757571
McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., ... &
Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a
flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(9), 1–8. doi:
10.5688/ajpe779196
McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., ...
Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: A course redesign to foster learning and
336
engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 236–243. doi:

10.1097/acm.0000000000000086
McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (3rd ed.). New York,
NY: Harper Collins.
Milman, N. B. (2012). The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it best be
used? Distance Learning, 9(3), 85–87.
Missildine, K., Fountain, R., Summers, L., & Gosselin, K. (2013). Flipping the classroom to improve
student performance and satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(10), 597–599. doi:
10.3928/01484834-20130919-03
Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.
Morgan, H. (2014). Focus on Technology: Flip Your Classroom to Increase Academic Achievement.
Childhood Education, 90(3), 239-241. doi:10.1080/00094056.2014.912076
Nederveld, A., & Berge, Z. L. (2015). Flipped learning in the workplace. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 27(2), 162–172.
Nguyen, T. C. (2010). Challenges of learning English in Australia towards students coming from
selected Southeast Asian countries: Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia. International
Education Studies, 4(1), 13–20. doi:10.5539/ies.v4n1p13
Özyurt, Ö., & Özyurt, H. (2015). Learning style based individualized adaptive e-learning
environments: Content analysis of the articles published from 2005 to 2014. Computers in
Human Behavior, 52, 349-358. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.020
Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2009). College students' social networking
experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 227-238.
doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010
Poon, J. (2014). A cross-country comparison on the use of blended learning in property education.
Property Management, 32(2), 154-175. doi:10.1108/pm-04-2013-0026
Richter, T., & McPherson, M. (2012). Open educational resources: Education for the world?
Distance Education, 33(2), 201–219. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2012.692068
Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction
and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84.
doi:10.1016/j.iree.2014.08.003
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New
Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
337
Sams, A., & Bergmann, J. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every
day. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
Simpson, V., & Richards, E. (2015). Flipping the classroom to teach population health: Increasing
the relevance. Nurse Education in Practice, 15(3), 162-167. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2014.12.001
Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K–12 blended learning. Retrieved from
http://www.christenseninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Classifying-K-12-
blended-learning.pdf
Talley, C. P., & Scherer, S. (2013). The enhanced flipped classroom: increasing academic
performance with student-recorded lectures and practice testing in a "flipped" stem course.
(2013). The Journal of Negro Education, 82(3), 339-347.
doi:10.7709/jnegroeducation.82.3.0339
Touchton, M. (2015). Flipping the classroom and student performance in advanced statistics:
Evidence from a quasi-experiment. Journal of Political Science Education, 11(1), 28-44.
doi:10.1080/15512169.2014.985105
Tune, J. D., Sturek, M., & Basile, D. P. (2013). Flipped classroom model improves graduate student
performance in cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal physiology. AJP: Advances in
Physiology Education, 37(4), 316-320. doi:10.1152/advan.00091.2013
Wang, S., & Heffernan, N. (2009). Ethical issues in computer-assisted language learning:
Perceptions of teachers and learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5),
796-813. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00983.x
Wang, Z. J. (2013). A new perspective of instructional interaction research in distance education:

Structuralism. Modern Distance Education Research, 5, 28–33.
Warner, J. A., Koufteros, X., & Verghese, A. (2014). Learning computerese: The role of second
language learning aptitude in technology acceptance. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 74(6), 991-1017. doi:10.1177/0013164414520629
Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social
constructivist interpretation. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 15-25.
doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.005
Yang, S. C., & Chen, Y. (2007). Technology-enhanced language learning: A case study. Computers in
Human Behavior, 23(1), 860-879. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.02.015
Zainuddin, Z., & Attaran, M. (2015). Malaysian students’ perceptions of flipped classroom: A case
study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-11.
doi:10.1080/14703297.2015.1102079
Zepke, N., Leach, L., & Butler, P. (2009). Student motivation and engagement in learning. In
proceedings of the 32nd HERDSA annual conference, the student experience, Darwin, 6-9
July 2009 (pp. 529–538).
338
Appendix
Table A1
Lists of Flipped Classroom Articles Selected and Reviewed from Professional Journals
Author(s) Journal Article title

and year
Davies et al. Educational Technology Flipping the classroom and
(2013) Research and Development instructional technology
(ETR&D) integration in a college-level
information systems
spreadsheet course.
Tune et al. Advances in physiology Flipped classroom model
(2013) education (APE) improves graduate student
performance in
cardiovascular, respiratory,
and renal physiology.
McLaughlin American journal of Pharmacy student
et al. (2013) pharmaceutical education engagement, performance,
(AJPE) and perception in a flipped
satellite classroom.
Talley et al. The Journal of Negro Education The enhanced flipped
(2013) (JNE) classroom: Increasing
academic performance with
student-recorded lectures and
practice testing in a "flipped"
STEM course.
Missildine Journal of Nursing Education Flipping the classroom to
et al. (2013) (JNE) improve student performance
and satisfaction.
Enfield TechTrends Looking at the impact of the
(2013) flipped classroom model of
instruction on undergraduate
multimedia students at CSUN.
McGivney- PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, Flipping calculus.
Burelle and and Issues in Mathematics
Xue (2013) Undergraduate Studies
Love (2014) International Journal of Student learning and
Mathematical Education in perceptions in a flipped linear
Science and Technology algebra course.
(IJMEST)
Roach International Review of Student perceptions toward
(2014) Economics Education (IREE) flipped learning: New methods
to increase interaction and
active learning in economics.
Kim et al. The Internet and Higher The experience of three flipped
(2014) Education (I&HE) classrooms in an urban
university: an exploration of
design principles.
Baepler et Computers & Education (C&E) It's not about seat time:
al. (2014) Blending, flipping, and
efficiency in active learning
classrooms.
Kong Computers & Education (C&E) Developing information
339
(2014) literacy and critical thinking

skills through domain
knowledge learning in digital
classrooms: An experience of
practicing flipped classroom
strategy.
Galway et BMC medical education A novel integration of online
al. (2014) and flipped classroom
instructional models in public
health higher education
Chen (2014) Computers & Education (C&E) Is FLIP enough? Or should we
use the FLIPPED model
instead?
Warner et Educational and Psychological Learning computerese: The
al. (2014) Measurement (EPM) role of second language
learning aptitude in
technology acceptance.
McLaughlin Academic Medicine (AM) The flipped classroom: a
et al. (2014) course redesign to foster
learning and engagement in a
health professions school.
Chen and The International Review of Developing, using, and
Summers, Research in Open and interacting in the flipped
(2015) Distributed Learning (IRROD) learning movement: Gaps
among subject areas.
Hung Computer Assisted Language Flipping the classroom for
(2015) Learning (CALL) English language learners to
foster active learning.
Touchton Journal of Political Science Flipping the classroom and
(2015) Education (JPSE) student performance in
advanced statistics: Evidence
from a quasi-experiment.
Simpson Nurse Education in Practice Flipping the classroom to
and (NEP) teach population health:
Richards, Increasing the relevance.
(2015)
340
View publication stats

Flipped Classroom Research and Trends From Different Fields of Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flipped Classroom Research and Trends From Different Fields of Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flipped Classroom Research and Trends From Different Fields of Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Flipped Classroom Research and Trends from Different Fields of Study

Article in International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning · May 2016

Zamzami Zainuddin Siti Hajar Halili

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Flipped learning View project

A-maze-ing World of Museum View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Flipped Classroom Research and Trends from

Zamzami Zainuddin1 and Siti Hajar Halili2

Technology, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

Keywords: flipped classroom, Bloom’s revised taxonomy, achievement, engagement, motivation,

Related Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

2. Understanding: the students try to demonstrate their understanding, interpret the

5. Evaluating: assessment or established peer-review knowledge, judge in relational terms; in

Figure 1. Bloom’s revised taxonomy in the flipped classroom

Level of learning Traditional classroom Flipped classroom tools

Purpose of the Study and Research Questions

1. What methodologies have been frequently employed in flipped classroom research?

2. What areas of flipped classroom studies have been researched?

7. What are the challenges of applying the flipped classroom approach?

 A specific focus on flipped classroom research

 A current publication in years 2013, 2014 and 2015

 Containing various field of studies

Findings and Discussion

Research Methodologies Employed in Flipped Classroom Research

Figure 2. Percentage of research methods.

Figure 3. Frequency of research methods in each year.

Figure 4. Data collection (instruments).

Area of Studies in the Flipped Classroom

Technology Tools or Online Platforms Used in the Flipped Classroom

Technological Tools or Online Platforms in Flipped Classroom Research (2013–2015)

Source: (author, year) Technology tools or Online Platforms

McLaughlin et al. (2013) Echo360 Classroom Capture (Echo360 Inc.,

Love et al. (2014) Online screencasts and LaTeX beamer package.

Roach (2014) Blog, online software (http:// ed.ted.com), video

Baepler et al. (2014) A video message board, microphones, large-screen

Kong (2014) A tablet PC, Online pre-lesson learning and a

Missildine et al. (2013) Interactive television.

Enfield (2013) Course Website

Hung (2015) WebQuest

The Most Frequently Cited References

according to a Google scholar (https://scholar.google.com/) report in April 2016, Bergmann and

The References List of Most Cited Studies

Rank Frequency References

1 8 Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom:

1 8 Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting

2 5 Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011).

2 5 Berrett, D. (2012). How ‘flipping’ the classroom can

2 5 Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted

2 5 Baker, J. W. (2000). The “classroom flip”: Using web

Impacts on Students’ Learning

Author(s) and year Impacts

Davies et al. (2013) Achievement of most students was significantly

Tune et al. (2013) By having a quiz and class meeting, students’

performance was improved especially in the exam.

Missildine et al. (2013) Flipped classroom can improve students’ performance.

Enfield (2013) Effective in helping students learn the content of

Talley and Scherer Improved students’ average course grades when