View PDF VersionPrevious ArticleNext Article
 
DOI: 10.1039/D2RP00339B (Paper) Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 2023, 24, 1025-1034

Impacts of the flipped classroom on student performance and problem solving skills in secondary school chemistry courses†

Liang Yu *a, Yueru Li a, Yu Lan a and Huzhi Zheng b
aFaculty of Education, Southwest University, Chongqing, China. E-mail: yuliang@swu.edu.cn
bSchool of Chemistry and Chemical Engineer, Southwest University, Chongqing, China

Received 23rd December 2022 , Accepted 21st April 2023

First published on 5th May 2023

Abstract

The use of the flipped classroom approach in chemistry courses has rapidly increased over the past decade, and it appears that this type of learning environment will play an essential role in improving student success. However, it's crucial to note that the majority of these studies were carried out in higher education environments. There hasn’t been much research comparing flipped to traditional classrooms in K-12 institutions. The majority of comparisons between flipped and non-flipped groups were taught by different teachers, and typically conducted over a brief period of time, often a few weeks. The purpose of this study is to examine the impacts of the flipped classroom on student performance and problem solving skills in chemistry courses. A two-stage experiment was conducted in a secondary school in the Northwestern part of China with the flipped classroom group including 46 students, 20 males and 26 females and the non-flipped classroom group consisting of 50 students, 30 males and 20 females. Both groups were taught by the same chemistry teacher with eight years of teaching experience. Independent t-tests showed that the flipped classroom significantly improved student academic performance compared to the non-flipped classroom, and this effect lasted for at least one year. The study also found that flipped classrooms have a more progressive impact on students’ problem solving skills, which always take a long teaching period. Meanwhile, the research findings revealed that most students preferred or strongly preferred the flipped classroom approach after they experienced it. However, as the duration of the teaching experiment grows, students’ attitudes toward the flipped classroom approach tend to polarize.

Introduction

Among the many recent educational innovations facilitated by technological advancements, the flipped classroom model has become increasingly popular. The flipped classroom was first used by Eric Mazur, who employed information technology in his physics teaching to provide pre-class instruction and in-class seminars, reconstructing the teaching process and offering additional opportunities for engagement with students (Arnaud, 2013). Bergmann and Sams (2012) introduced the flipped classroom in the year 2007 when their students missed too many chemistry classes due to tournaments, and in response they recorded instructional videos for their students’ out-of-class time and used class time for discussions. Since then, the flipped classroom has gained popularity.

During this pedagogical model, students do some of the traditional in-class lectures as pre-class work in an online, asynchronous mode, and some of the traditional individual homework is accomplished via collaborative group work in the live classroom (Casselman et al., 2019). Although the flipped classroom has grown in popularity as a teaching method over the last decade, the specific meaning varies depending on the audience or subject in which it is discussed. According to Eichler (2022), the flipped classroom is a classroom format in which a portion of the typical in-person didactic lecture has been shifted to an isolated preclass learning environment in order to facilitate more active learning in the live classroom. Other researchers have defined the flipped classroom as a pedagogical paradigm whereby learning material is supplied to students via self-regulated online learning prior to in-person meetings and face-to-face class time can be used for problem solving activities and collaborative learning (Strayer, 2012; Bokosmaty et al., 2019).

Although the emphasis of the many definitions varies, what is more consistent is that students acquire knowledge independently using materials outside the classroom and concentrate on group interaction, problem solving, and application of knowledge in the classroom. Abeysekera and Dawson (2015) described three major pedagogical features of the flipped classroom that are consistent with this notion: (1) the knowledge transfer process is moved outside of the classroom; (2) students in the classroom engage in active learning, which fosters teacher–student and student–student interactions; and (3) students complete tasks outside of the class to maximize class time. The goal of the flipped classroom is to “flip” the teacher's function in the classroom from explaining and showing concepts to guiding and assisting students in their learning (Reid, 2016).

A great body of literature has revealed that the flipped classroom model may improve students’ academic performance in chemistry courses for both high schools (Schultz et al., 2014; Olakanmi, 2017) and colleges (Butzler, 2015; Rossi, 2015; Hibbard et al., 2016; Mooring et al., 2016; Shattuck, 2016). Seery (2015) reviewed the efficacy of flipped classrooms on student learning achievements in chemistry and their analysis reveals that flipped classrooms generally result in better student performance. Ryan and Reid (2016) conducted experimental research in general chemistry and reported that the flipped treatment conditions outperformed the traditional classroom conditions in exam performance. Crimmins and Midkiff (2017) compared the flipped classroom approach to historical data employing traditional lectures in their organic chemistry class and found that students in the flipped classroom scored higher than those in traditional lectures. Most recently, Dehghan et al. (2022) conducted an experimental study of the flipped classroom in the course Organic Chemistry II, which was taken by second- and third-year college students over a one-semester period, but found no significant difference in student grades between courses taught with and without a flipped classroom framework.

There was also some research examining the effect of flipped classes on students’ problem solving skills. Fautch (2015) conducted three semesters of flipped classroom instruction in an organic chemistry class, measuring students’ self-approval of chemical problem solving skills at the beginning and end of each semester. The results of the study showed significant improvements in both the first and third semesters. Gao and Hew (2021) developed the 5E-based flipped teaching model and used it in elementary programming courses, which revealed that this model has the potential to improve both the computational problem solving abilities of fourth graders as well as their comprehension of the principles underlying computational thinking. Lin (2019) utilized a flipped classroom approach to a software engineering course in order to cultivate college students’ high-order thinking skills and ability to apply software engineering technology to solve practical problems after learning. He found that students who learned with the flipped classroom model had stronger problem solving skills than those who learned with the traditional-classroom learning approach. Chen et al. (2015) examined cooperative learning in a flipped classroom model by utilizing the Q-methodology and the results showed that college students’ problem solving skills were improved in the statistics course. Other empirical research studies also demonstrated that the flipped classroom approach had enhanced college students’ problem solving skills in engineering courses (Baytiyeh and Naja, 2017; Yelamarthi and Drake, 2015). However, little research has addressed the effect of the flipped classroom model on K12 students’ problem solving skills in chemistry.

In addition to academic achievement and problem solving skills, students’ perception of learning experience is also an essential learning outcome. Several review studies on students’ opinions of flipped classroom learning experiences have demonstrated that the flipped classroom leads to increased student satisfaction relative to traditional teaching (Bredow et al., 2021; Rahman and Lewis, 2020; Strelan et al., 2020). Reimer et al. (2021) applied the flipped classroom approach to an organic chemistry course and found that both repeating students and non-repeating students responded positively to the flipped course structure. Schultz et al. (2014) conducted a mixed-methods study to investigate the effects of the flipped classroom on high school advanced placement chemistry students. The results indicated that the majority of students preferred or strongly preferred the flipped classroom model and the most frequent response in favor of the flipped classroom was the ability to pause, rewind, and go back to review. Shattuck (2016) also conducted an exploratory, mixed-methods study to investigate the effectiveness of a partially flipped course in a first semester organic chemistry course, and found that the flipped classroom approach leads to significant improvements in student perceptions about their learning experience. Dehghan et al. (2022) assessed student learning and enjoyment in their flipped organic chemistry course using a student satisfaction questionnaire, which proved that the majority of students believed that the flipped classroom approach improved their learning outcomes, and they preferred it to traditional classes. Many other empirical studies of teaching in non-chemistry subjects have also indicated that flipped classrooms improved students’ perceptions of the learning experience and they generally had positive attitudes about the flipped classroom approach (Shattuck, 2016; Awidi and Paynter, 2019; Murillo-Zamorano et al., 2019; Martínez-Jiménez and Ruiz-Jiménez, 2020).

However, it's crucial to note that the majority of these studies were carried out in higher education environments (Lo et al., 2018). There are only a few research studies comparing flipped to traditional classrooms in K-12 institutions for chemistry courses (Schultz et al., 2014; Olakanmi, 2017; Sookoo-Singh and Boisselle, 2018). The majority of comparisons between flipped and non-flipped groups are made by different teachers, which has led to biased comparisons and weakened the validity of the findings. Furthermore, these comparisons were typically conducted over a brief period of time, often a few weeks. Cevikbas and Kaiser (2022) suggested conducting long-term comparison experiments to test whether the impacts of flipped classrooms can persist throughout this long-term intervention.

In the present study, we attempted to fill gaps in the existing literature by focusing on chemistry courses in secondary school and noting that there have been few quantitative, experimental studies of the flipped classroom approach over an entire semester in which lecture and flipped sections were taught by the same teacher concurrently and longitudinally. Moreover, the experimental and control classes are taught at the same academic level, which is confirmed by pre-testing. This type of study can control many variables, such as instructor, content, delivery, and evaluations. Therefore, the following research questions guided the design of this research.

(1) How does the flipped classroom affect student academic performance and problem solving skills with both the control group and experiment taught by the same teacher in secondary school chemistry courses?

(2) What are students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom approach in secondary school chemistry courses?

Methods

Participants

This study was conducted in a secondary school, located in the northwestern part of China. A chemistry teacher who had been teaching for eight years participated in the present study by teaching two parallel classes, one of which served as an experimental class (flipped) and one as a control class (non-flipped). Initially, 101 students were involved in the study; however, data from five students who missed the initial test, fall semester test or spring semester test had to be deleted. The resulting sample comprised a total of 96 (95.05%) nine grade students (52.08% male). As shown in Table 1, the flipped classroom group includes 46 students, 20 males and 26 females and the non-flipped classroom group consists of 50 students, 30 males and 20 females. The flipped classroom group consisted of 44 Han Chinese students and two non-Han Chinese students, whereas the non-flipped classroom group had 47 Han Chinese students and three non-Han Chinese students. The present study took place in the fall 2020 and spring 2021 semesters and were approved by the Academic Ethics Committee of Faculty of Education, Southwest University in China. All participants were informed of the purpose and procedures of the study and were told that all data would remain anonymous and confidential, after which informed verbal consent was subsequently obtained.
Table 1 Demographic comparisons
Demographics Flipped group Non-flipped group
Grade 9 9
Gender
Males 20 30
Females 26 20
Nationality
Han 44 47
Not Han 2 3
Sum 46 50

Experimental background

The school, located in an urban region of a city in northwestern China, serves as a model for the implementation of “Internet Plus Education”, which is widely referred to as the merger of internet technology and education. This school has a gigabit campus network as well as an infrastructure environment for flipped classroom instruction. Since 2019, the school has been promoting “Internet Plus Education” with the policy and financial backing of the education authorities and has made the flipped classroom method an essential aspect of the school's teaching reform. Simultaneously, the school notified every parent about the teaching reform and communicated with them multiple times to gain their approval and support. Furthermore, the school is in an urban region with a high Internet penetration rate and more than two Internet terminals per family, which may completely fulfil the students’ demands for out-of-class online study. Additionally, the traditional Chinese culture advocates that education and parents will establish good learning environments for their children as much as possible even if their social economic position is not high (Liu, 2017). As a result, parents will actively participate in the school's teaching reform and support students’ out-of-class online learning.

Experimental design

To ensure the reliability of the experiment, both the experimental and control classes were taught by the same teacher. The experiment was conducted for one academic year, from September 2020 to July 2021, and was divided into two semesters, one for 18 weeks in the fall semester and one for 16 weeks in the spring semester (two weeks shorter because students took the high school entrance test), both having six class times each week. Because students had not studied chemistry prior to the experiment, the initial test results of academic performance were averaged across all subjects at the end of the eighth grade. Students were assessed twice, on the chemistry test and open-ended questions at the end of the fall and spring semesters. Student problem solving skills were tested three times, at the beginning of the experiment and in the end of both the fall semester and the spring semester.
Course format. According to Chemistry Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education of China, junior high school chemistry education aims to arouse students’ interest in learning chemistry, guide them to understand the laws of change in the material world, and form basic chemistry concepts (Deng and Wang, 2012). It also directs them to experience the process of scientific inquiry, enlighten their scientific thinking, and develop their practical skills. At the same time, it attempts to facilitate them to understand the interrelationship between chemistry, technology, society, and the environment, comprehend the nature of science, and imbue them with the spirit of science.

The ninth-grade chemistry textbook contains 12 units separated into two volumes: the upper volume contains units 1–7, while the lower volume contains units 8–12. The upper volume includes the following topics: (1) matter changes and properties, chemical disciplines, and entering the chemical laboratory, (2) air, oxygen, and the production of oxygen, (3) molecules and atoms, atomic composition, elements, and ions, (4) water resources, purification of water, water composition, chemical formulas and valences, (5) the law of mass conservation, correctly writing chemical equations, and simple calculations using chemical equations, (6) diamond, graphite, and C60, carbon dioxide generation, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide research, and (7) combustion and fire extinguishing, fuel use and development. The lower volume covers: (8) metallic materials, chemical properties of metals, utilization and conservation of metallic resources, (9) solution formation, solubility, mass fraction of solutes, (10) common acids and bases, acid and base neutralization reactions, (11) common salts in life, chemical fertilizers, and (12) essential nutrients for humans, chemical elements and human health, organic synthetic materials.

Flipped classroom group. The flipped classroom approach in the present study includes three phases: pre-class, in-class, and after-class, as shown in Fig. 1(a). In the pre-class phase, students engage in self-directed learning using the micro-video provided by the instructor. The micro-video combines explanations of theoretical information and chemical experiments, with the latter divided into two categories: substance preparation and chemical properties of substances. The micro-video blends theoretical knowledge and chemical experimental phenomena, which can boost students’ in-depth learning. Furthermore, the visual presentation of chemical experiments also contributes to raising students’ interest in their studies. Students then take an online test that goes along with the micro-video to assess their understanding. The Ningxia Education Cloud, a popular learning management system in the western part of China, will offer the instructor with feedback on all student learning outcomes.
image file: d2rp00339b-f1.tif
Fig. 1 Flipped classroom and non-flipped classroom approach.

During the in-class phase, students are taught in a face-to-face situation, where teachers first correct students’ misconceptions based on the online test results, then sort out the teaching knowledge points and systematically develop students’ knowledge map. Then, the teacher focuses on providing examples and introducing extended problem solving in small groups of two to five students, which helps students broaden their conceptual understanding and achieve greater levels of cognition. Students were asked to work through the problems by applying the acquired knowledge independently. The teachers promoted peer-to-peer problem solving exchanges and assisted students who needed help with a particular difficulty. Students had increased opportunities to interact with curriculum materials and receive quick feedback during in-class activities.

In the after-class phase, students conduct problem-based online tests (theoretical knowledge test questions or virtual simulation chemistry experiments) to consolidate what they have learned and improve their problem solving skills. In addition, each student self-evaluates their learning performance, reflects on the problem solving process, and writes a reflective notebook with individualized guidance provided by the teacher.

Non-flipped classroom group. Non-flipped classroom employs traditional teaching methods, including the following stages: lecture and demonstration, in-class exercise, group discussion, and class summary, which are shown in Fig. 1(b). In the lecture and demonstration stage, the teacher presents the teaching objectives, reviews previous knowledge, teaches new knowledge, and then demonstrates chemical experiments live or through animations to establish the connection between rational knowledge and perceptual cognition. During the in-class exercise stage, the teacher designs in-class exercises aligned with the learning objectives and assigns them to students in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction. In the group discussion stage, the teacher will offer targeted questions based on students’ exercise completion, guide students to establish groups and carry out discussions, and further consolidate and reinforce the mastery of knowledge through peer interaction and communication. In contrast to the flipped classroom approach, which offers three sessions of active learning (steps 1, 4, and 6), the non-flipped classroom approach has just one session of active learning (step 3). During the stage of class summary, the teacher goes over the information that was presented in the lecture, summarizes the points of knowledge, explains the connections between the points of knowledge in order to aid students in developing their own knowledge system, and assigns homework.

Measures

The measuring tools of this study included tests of chemical academic performance and problem solving skills. Initial test scores were averaged across all subjects at the end of the eighth grade, which was conducted to establish the equivalence between the flipped group and its non-flipped counterpart.
Problem solving skills. Problem solving skills were measured by the items adapted from the scales used by Yang and Zhang (2017). They were modified slightly to fit into the secondary school context and consisted of four subscales: (1) understanding (five items; example question “I can clearly understand the causes and consequences of the problem.”), (2) representing (four items; example question “Others can clearly understand what I am saying about the problem.”), (3) executing (six items; example question “I always come up with solutions for problems.”), and (4) reflecting (five items; example question “After the problem is solved, I will analyze whether there is a better solution to the problem.”). Items for each subscale are measured on a 5-point end point defined Likert-type scale with 1 representing “very untrue of me” and 5 representing “very true of me”. The scores for each subscale item are added up to create the subscale scores, which are then added together to provide the overall score for the problem solving skill scale, which ranges from 20 to 100. High scores on the scale indicated greater levels of problem solving skills.

All four subscales achieved acceptable estimates of internal reliability (αunderstanding = 0.881, αrepresenting = 0.892, αexecuting = 0.918, αreflecting = 0.901) in this study.

Chemical academic performance. Students’ chemical academic performance is based on the final test results of each semester. The final tests are usually organized by the local education commission, and the test papers have good reliability and validity.

Students’ perception about the flipped classroom approach

A questionnaire was used to study experiment group perceptions about the flipped classroom approach. The questionnaire consisted of a rating scale based on the Likert scale and open-ended items that allowed students to explain their choices. The Likert scale measures students’ satisfaction toward the flipped classroom approach on a five-point scale, with 1 representing “Very dissatisfied”, 2 representing “Dissatisfied”, 3 representing “Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied”, 4 for “Satisfied”, and 5 for “Very satisfied”. The open-ended items include three questions: “what are the advantages of the flipped classroom?”, “what are the disadvantages of the flipped classroom?”, and “what suggestions would you provide for teachers to perform flipped classroom?”

Results

This section reports on the results from the initial test, fall semester test and spring semester test of academic performance and problem solving skills, and the semi-structured questionnaire surveys on the students’ perception of a flipped classroom. The first set of results examines the impacts of the flipped classroom on student academic performance, the second set examines the impacts of the flipped classroom on student problem solving skills, and the final set of results explores the students’ overall perception of the flipped classroom.

The effect of the flipped classroom on students’ academic performance

The independent sample t-test was conducted with SPSS to examine the difference in students’ academic performance between flipped and non-flipped groups. As shown in Table 2, there was no significant difference (t = 0.221, p = 0.826) between the flipped classroom group and the non-flipped classroom group in terms of the initial-test scores averaged across all subjects at the end of the eighth grade, which indicated that the academic performance of the two groups was comparable. The fall semester test scores of the flipped classroom were significantly higher (t = 2.089, p = 0.039) compared to that of the non-flipped classroom with a medium effect (d = 0.431). Furthermore, there was a more significant difference (t = 2.985, p = 0.004) in spring semester academic performance between the flipped classroom group and the non-flipped classroom group with a medium effect (d = 0.616).
Table 2 Independent sample t-test on student academic performance
Assessment Group Mean SD t-Value p-Value Cohen's d
Initial-test Flipped 63.48 13.388 0.221 0.826 0.046
Non-flipped 62.89 12.802
Fall semester test Flipped 71.52 14.237 2.089 0.039 0.431
Non-flipped 63.78 21.096
Spring semester test Flipped 76.41 11.826 2.985 0.004 0.616
Non-flipped 64.56 24.421

Taken together, the findings suggested that the flipped classroom had a positive impact on student academic performance in chemistry, and it lasted for two semesters.

The effect of the flipped classroom on students’ problem solving skills

An independent sample t-test was conducted to examine the difference in students’ problem solving skills between flipped and non-flipped groups. Looking at Table 3, it is apparent that there was no significant difference (t = 0.697, p = 0.487) between the flipped classroom and the non-flipped classroom for the initial-test.
Table 3 Independent sample t-test on student problem solving skills
Assessment Group Mean SD t-Value p-Value Cohen's d
Initial-test Flipped 70.78 10.132 0.697 0.487 0.144
Non-flipped 69.30 10.660
Fall semester test Flipped 75.04 12.804 1.669 0.098 0.344
Non-flipped 70.84 11.869
Spring semester test Flipped 80.15 15.623 2.575 0.012 0.531
Non-flipped 72.44 13.717

For the fall semester test, there still was no significant difference (t = 1.669, p = 0.098) between flipped and non-flipped classrooms with a small effect size (d = 0.344). For the spring semester test, the problem solving skills of the flipped classroom was greater (t = 2.575, p = 0.012) than that of the non-flipped classroom with a medium effect size (d = 0.531).

These findings imply that flipped classrooms have a more progressive impact on students’ problem solving skills, which always take a long teaching period.

Students’ perceptions about the flipped classroom approach

Students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom were evaluated utilizing two methods. The first was a rating scale for descriptive statistics. The second was an open-ended question coding analysis. The coding process consisted of two stages: in the first stage, two research assistants read all student responses but did not code them; in the second stage, the two research assistants categorized student responses according to themes and counted the number of occurrences of each theme, and they had to reach a consensus on the categorization and counting processes.

As shown in Fig. 2, the majority of students preferred or strongly preferred the flipped classroom model. However, students’ preference for the flipped classroom did not significantly increase in the spring semester compared to the fall semester and showed a polarizing trend.


image file: d2rp00339b-f2.tif
Fig. 2 Descriptive statistics of students’ perception.

The five most frequent responses about the advantages of the flipped classroom in the fall term were able to conduct self-paced learning (n = 15), have better preparation before class (n = 14), increase study effort (n = 12), increase knowledge (n = 9), and be absent but able to keep up (n = 9). And in the spring semester, the most common replies were able to conduct self-paced learning (n = 18), have better preparation before class (n = 16), enhance friendship (n = 9), improve problem solving skills (n = 7), and support interest (n = 7). The most mentioned responses about the disadvantages of flipped classroom in the fall semester were increasing workload (n = 12), lacking teachers’ support during micro-courses (n = 9), some problems being too difficult to solve during in-class (n = 9), and poor communication between peers after class (n = 7). And in the spring semester, the most frequent responses were adoption problems (n = 11), not high enough quality micro-courses (n = 9), and higher self-regulated ability (n = 8).

The advice students have for future flipped classroom teachers in the fall term is to join reflection and communication during after class, increase entertainments and interests of micro-course, guide students’ problem solving during in-class, and improve parents’ acceptance about online learning. And in the spring semester, students’ suggestions were reducing the review of micro-courses before lecture, scripting complicated collaborative learning activity, and showcasing the top performers in online follow-up tests.

Discussion

The goals of this study were to develop students’ academic performance and problem solving skills and examine students’ perception in flipped chemistry courses.

The development of students’ academic performance

The research results show that the flipped classroom significantly improved student academic performance than the non-flipped approach in the chemistry courses, which is consistent with prior research (Ryan and Reid, 2016; Shattuck, 2016; Crimmins and Midkiff, 2017).

Most previous research studies on flipped classrooms have run to less than one semester, and while the majority indicated that the flipped classroom promoted student academic performance, it is uncertain whether these impacts are long-lasting. Several studies advised that empirical studies of flipped classroom training should last at least one year in order to assess the stability of flipped classroom effects (Bhagat et al., 2016; Lo et al., 2018; Cevikbas and Kaiser, 2022). The current study filled the gap and further revealed that the effect of flipped classroom on academic performance in chemistry courses could last for a long time (two semesters). This confirms the stability of the effect of the flipped classroom approach. One possible explanation is that the flipped classroom constructs a learning environment where learners self-manage and support themselves. According to the self-determination theory perspective, when students’ basic psychological needs such as autonomy and competence are met, they will be able to stimulate intrinsic motivation, increase engagement, produce lasting change, and improve learning outcomes (Deci and Ryan, 2004). In the present study, the flipped classroom approach allows students to learn videos, micro-lessons, and related materials at their own pace during pre-class. They can solve problems with peer collaboration and teacher guidance and experience a sense of learning accomplishment within in-class. During after-class, they would complete online exercises and reflect on their learning to understand their learning gains, which may enhance their sense of self-efficacy. This approach meets the psychological needs of students for autonomy and competence, which in turn improves student performance and is sustainable. This finding is consistent with the results of prior studies, which indicated that self-managed and supported learning environments significantly enhanced students’ learning experiences and academic achievement (Haerens et al., 2015; Ryan and Deci, 2017; Cho et al., 2021).

Another possible explanation is that the flipped classroom fosters an environment of interpersonal communication that is conducive to the development of strong, long-lasting interpersonal relationships between teachers and students, which in turn results in long-term improvements in student academic performance. According to social constructivism, learning occurs in social contexts and is guided by models; learners imitate the behavior of models, receive feedback from models, and construct knowledge through interpersonal interactions with models (Bandura and Walters, 1977). In a flipped classroom, students can see teachers and classmates as models, emulate their behavior, and internalize content. Moreover, problem solving, group discussions, and reflective communication activities in the flipped classroom generate a pleasant interpersonal climate that can result in long-term benefits in the learning experience and academic performance. Additionally, prior research has demonstrated that an interpersonal communication atmosphere significantly sustainably increases learner engagement and improves academic performance (Wubbels et al., 2012; Charalampous and Kokkinos, 2018; Rebeiro et al., 2021).

The development of student problem solving skills

The results revealed that flipped classroom has a positive effect on students’ problem solving skills, which are in agreement with some previous research studies (Chen et al., 2015; Fautch, 2015; Lin, 2019). By taking some of the instruction into an online environment, flipped learning creates time and space during class time for such problem solving activities (Hussain et al., 2020). Both in-class and after-class stages of the flipped classroom approach focus on problems, which encourages students to interact and share their ideas to solve the assigned problem, and the teacher was there to facilitate and give feedback to students. In the communication and reflection steps, students have the opportunity to review their problem solving processes and bounce ideas off peers, which contributes to students’ analysis skills and problem solving skills.

The results further revealed that flipped classrooms have a more progressive impact on students’ problem solving skills in contrast to academic performance, which always takes a long teaching period. This finding is consistent with that of Kloosterman and Stage (1992) who suggested that problem solving is time-consuming based on the acquirement of knowledge. Problem solving, which falls under the category of higher-order thinking skills, is a complicated cognitive process that calls on students to integrate knowledge from the disciplines of reading, mathematics, and science in order to address real-world issues (Dostál, 2015). In addition, knowledge acquisition is a necessity for the development of problem solving skills, and only after acquiring a specific knowledge base can problem solving skills be developed accordingly. As Shattuck (2016) posited, the lower-order skill of memorizing facts is as important as the higher-order skill of problem solving in the chemistry course and the memorization of chemical formulas and the acquisition of factual knowledge are prerequisites for the development of problem solving skills. The main factor used to measure academic performance is knowledge acquisition. Consequently, students’ problem solving skills tend to lag behind academic performance advances in the practice of the flipped classroom.

Students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom approach

The survey of this study showed that the majority of students preferred or strongly preferred the flipped classroom model. This finding aligns with prior research studies suggesting that most students were quite positive on the flipped classroom approach after they experienced it (Schultz et al., 2014; Seery, 2015; Reid, 2016; Dehghan et al., 2022).

However, students’ preference for the flipped classroom did not significantly increase in the spring semester compared to the fall semester and showed a polarizing trend. This is consistent with the findings of He et al. (2016), who stated that the views of students regarding the flipped classroom are not static and will tend to polarize over time, with those who favor the flipped classroom developing a greater acceptance and those who oppose it developing a more negative attitude. One possible explanation might be that flipped classrooms provide students with opportunities for self-regulation, and students with high self-regulation skills, who are good at organizing and managing independent learning before class, group learning during class, and self-reflection after class, learn more efficiently and do well academically. Over time, they become more receptive to flipped classroom instruction (He et al., 2016). In contrast, students with poor self-regulation skills, who are accustomed to teacher-led learning and are less motivated to learn, do not adapt well to flipped classroom instruction. They have difficulty keeping up with the teaching, which leads to poorer academic performance, falling further behind in learning over time, and developing increasingly negative attitudes toward the flipped classroom (Cilli-Turner, 2015).

In terms of students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom, “self-paced learning” and “better preparation before class” were the most recognized advantages of the flipped classroom. This is consistent with previous research studies that have highlighted these two advantages of flipped classrooms (Schultz et al., 2014; González-Gómez et al., 2016; Akçayır and Akçayır, 2018). In addition, there were some differences between the fall end-of-semester and spring end-of-semester perceptions, with the fall focusing on the course format, such as “absent but able to keep up”, and the spring focusing more on the instructional effectiveness, such as “improved problem solving skills”. Regarding the disadvantages of flipped classroom, the fall concentrated on the external experience, such as “increasing workload”, while the spring focused on the internal conditions, such as “higher self-regulated ability”. This indicated that students’ understanding of the flipped classroom deepens as they experience it for a longer period of time. In terms of suggestions for teachers, the fall focused on teaching conditions and organization, such as “improve parents’ acceptance about online learning”, and the spring focused on improving teaching and learning processes, such as “scripting complicated collaborative learning activities”. This also suggested that as the use of flipped classroom instruction increases, teachers continue to enhance their teaching approaches and abilities.

Implication

Previous experimental studies on flipped classroom were typically conducted over a brief period of time, often a few weeks. Thus, long-period comparative experiments are highly recommended to examine if the effect of flipped classroom persists throughout a longer-term intervention (Lo et al., 2018; Cevikbas and Kaiser, 2022). This study fills this gap by conducting two semester-long experimental studies and confirming the effects of flipped classrooms on students’ academic performance last across a long-term treatment. It suggests that flipped classroom is a useful instructional strategy that may be implemented over the long run to improve student academic performance. The positive effect of flipped classroom instruction on problem solving skills is slower than academic achievement, and problem solving skill growth is based on knowledge acquisition. Thus, while emphasizing higher-order problem solving skills in chemistry instruction, emphasis should also be placed on basic chemistry knowledge. As flipped classroom instruction proceeds for a long time, there is a need for exercising caution over the polarizing impacts of this approach and its effect on lagging students. Chemistry teachers should pay close attention to students who are falling behind and provide timely care, guidance, and provide aid for them to overcome learning obstacles, enhance self-regulated skills, progressively adapt to this instructional approach, and increase self-confidence in learning.

Conclusions

The goals of the present study were to investigate the impacts of flipped classrooms on student performance and problem solving skills and students’ perception about flipped classrooms in secondary school chemistry courses. We conducted a two-stage experiment in a secondary school from the northwestern part of China. The research results showed that the flipped classroom significantly improved student academic performance compared to the non-flipped classroom, and this effect lasted for at least one year. The study also found that flipped classrooms have a more progressive impact on students’ problem solving skills, which always take a long teaching period. Meanwhile, the research findings revealed that the majority of students preferred or strongly preferred the flipped classroom approach after they experienced it. However, as the duration of the teaching experiment grows, students’ attitudes toward the flipped classroom approach tend to polarize.

There are a couple of limitations to this study. First, the experimental and control groups were not completely randomly grouped but were selected from two natural classes with comparable academic performance. We sought to overcome this through the use of a pretest. Second, even with anonymity, students’ self-reports of their problem solving skills on the surveys may be impacted by social desirability. Future studies could examine scores from standardized tests to better gauge the problem solving skill level. Third, the sample size was small with a total of 96 participants, 50 in the control group, and 46 in the experiment group. Fourth, the participants in this study were from a secondary school located in the northwestern part of China and caution should be exercised when extrapolating the findings to other populations. This school serves as a model for the implementation of “Internet Plus Education”, which promoted the flipped classroom teaching reform, and students’ parents actively cooperated with this reform, ensuring that the flipped classroom was accomplished both inside and outside of the school. Future research should examine the extent to which the current findings hold true for other schools in other countries.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts to declare.

Appendix A

Problem solving skill scale

Items of the problem solving skill scale are measured on a 5-point end point defined Likert-type scale with 1 representing “Very untrue of me”, 2 representing “Untrue of me”, 3 representing “neutral”, 4 representing “very true of me”, and 5 representing “very true of me”. High scores on subscales indicated greater levels of problem solving skills.

1. I can comprehend what the instructor or my students are saying.

2. I can clearly understand the causes and consequences of the problem.

3. I have never failed to solve a problem because of a misunderstanding.

4. I can accurately determine the type of problem and the knowledge involved.

5. I am able to evaluate the level of difficulty of a problem accurately.

6. I can often convince others to agree with me.

7. I can properly explain the issue's cause and relevant factors.

8. Others can clearly understand what I am saying about the problem.

9. I always take the initiative to discuss solutions to problems with others.

10. I can handle unexpected events in the problem solving process.

11. I always come up with solutions for problems.

12. If the problem is complex, I break it down into smaller problems and solve them one by one.

13. I will consider which solution is better when solving the problem.

14. When faced with a very difficult problem, I will reach out to others for help.

15. I always looked into options that peers hadn’t considered.

16. During the problem solving process, I will reflect on whether my thinking is correct.

17. During the problem solving process, I like to use outlines and keywords to help me analyze the problem.

18. I will review the problem solving process with the group members.

19. After the problem has been resolved, I will determine whether a superior solution exists.

20. I will summarize the problem solving experience and apply it to similar situations.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [grant number SWU2309108].

References

  1. Abeysekera L. and Dawson P., (2015), Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research, High. Educ. Res. Dev., 34(1), 1–14.
  2. Akçayır G. and Akçayır M., (2018), The flipped classroom: a review of its advantages and challenges, Comput. Educ., 126, 334–345.
  3. Arnaud C. H., (2013), Flipping chemistry classrooms, Chem. Eng. News, 91 (12), 41–43.
  4. Awidi I. T. and Paynter M., (2019), The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience, Comput. Educ., 128, 269–283.
  5. Bandura A. and Walters R. H., (1977), Social learning theory, Prentice Hall: Englewood cliffs.
  6. Baytiyeh H. and Naja M. K., (2017), Students’ perceptions of the flipped classroom model in an engineering course: a case study, Eur. J. Eng. Educ., 42(6), 1048–1061.
  7. Bergmann J. and Sams A., (2012), Flip your classroom: reach every student in every class every day, International society for technology in education.
  8. Bhagat K. K., Chang C. N. and Chang C. Y., (2016), The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school, J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 19(3), 134–142.
  9. Bokosmaty R., Bridgeman A. and Muir M., (2019), Using a partially flipped learning model to teach first year undergraduate chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 96(4), 629–639.
  10. Bredow C. A., Roehling P. V., Knorp A. J. and Sweet A. M., (2021), To flip or not to flip? a meta-analysis of the efficacy of flipped learning in higher education, Rev. Educ. Res., 91(6), 878–918.
  11. Butzler K. B., (2015), ConfChem conference on flipped classroom: flipping at an open enrollment college, J. Chem. Educ., 92(9), 1574–1576.
  12. Casselman M. D., Atit K., Henbest G., Guregyan C., Mortezaei K. and Eichler J. F., (2019), Dissecting the flipped classroom: using a randomized controlled trial experiment to determine when student learning occurs, J. Chem. Educ., 97(1), 27–35.
  13. Cevikbas M. and Kaiser G., (2022), Student engagement in a flipped secondary mathematics classroom, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 20(7), 1455–1480.
  14. Charalampous K. and Kokkinos C. M., (2018), The structure of pre-adolescents’ perceptions of their teacher's interpersonal behaviours and their relation to pre-adolescents’ learning outcomes, Educ. Studies, 44(2), 167–189.
  15. Chen L., Chen T.-L. and Chen N.-S., (2015), Students’ perspectives of using cooperative learning in a flipped statistics classroom, Australas. J. Educ. Technol., 31(6), 621–640.
  16. Cho H. J., Zhao K., Lee C. R., Runshe D. and Krousgrill C., (2021), Active learning through flipped classroom in mechanical engineering: improving students’ perception of learning and performance, Int. J. STEM Educ., 8(1), 1–13.
  17. Cilli-Turner E., (2015), Measuring learning outcomes and attitudes in a flipped introductory statistics course, Primus, 25(9–10), 833–846.
  18. Crimmins M. T. and Midkiff B., (2017), High structure active learning pedagogy for the teaching of organic chemistry: assessing the impact on academic outcomes, J. Chem. Educ., 94 (4), 429–438.
  19. Deci E. L. and Ryan R. M., (2004), Handbook of self-determination research, University Rochester Press.
  20. Dehghan S., Horan E. M. and Frome G., (2022), Investigating the impact of the flipped classroom on student learning and enjoyment in an organic chemistry course, J. Chem. Educ., 99(7), 2512–2519.
  21. Deng Y. and Wang H., (2012), The improvement of compulsory education chemistry curriculum standards: from ideal to practical, Chem. Teach., (8), 8–11.
  22. Dostál J., (2015), Theory of problem solving, Proc. - Soc. Behav. Sci., 174, 2798–2805.
  23. Eichler J. F., (2022), Future of the flipped classroom in chemistry education: recognizing the value of independent preclass learning and promoting deeper understanding of chemical ways of thinking during in-person instruction, J. Chem. Educ., 99(3), 1503–1508.
  24. Fautch J. M., (2015), The flipped classroom for teaching organic chemistry in small classes: is it effective? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 16(1), 179–186.
  25. Gao X. and Hew K. F., (2021), Toward a 5E-Based flipped classroom model for teaching computational thinking in elementary school: effects on student computational thinking and problem-solving performance, J. Educ. Comput. Res., 07356331211037757.
  26. González-Gómez D., Jeong J. S. and Airado Rodríguez D., (2016), Performance and perception in the flipped learning model: an initial approach to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching methodology in a general science classroom, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 25(3), 450–459.
  27. Haerens L., Aelterman N., Vansteenkiste M., Soenens B. and Van Petegem S., (2015), Do perceived autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching relate to physical education students’ motivational experiences through unique pathways? Distinguishing between the bright and dark side of motivation, Psychol. Sport Exerc., 16(P3), 26–36.
  28. He W., Holton A., Farkas G. and Warschauer M., (2016), The effects of flipped instruction on out-of-class study time, exam performance, and student perceptions, Learn. Instruction, 45, 61–71.
  29. Hibbard L., Sung S. and Wells B., (2016), Examining the effectiveness of a semi-self-paced flipped learning format in a college general chemistry sequence, J. Chem. Educ., 93(1), 24–30.
  30. Hussain S., Jamwal P. K., Munir M. T. and Zuyeva A., (2020), A quasi-qualitative analysis of flipped classroom implementation in an engineering course: from theory to practice, Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., 17(1), 1–19.
  31. Kloosterman P. and Stage F. K., (1992), Measuring beliefs about mathematical problem solving, School Sci. Math., 92, 109–115.
  32. Lin Y. T., (2019), Impacts of a flipped classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students’ learning performance, perception, and problem solving ability in a software engineering course, Comput. Hum. Behav., 95, 187–196.
  33. Liu B., (2017), A comparative study on the educational investment status of urban and rural families in China – an empirical analysis based on CFPS (2014) data, China Youth Studies, 262(12), 45–52.
  34. Lo C. K., Lie C. W. and Hew K. F. (2018), Applying “First Principles of Instruction” as a design theory of the flipped classroom: findings from a collective study of four secondary school subjects, Comput. Educ., 118, 150–165.
  35. Martínez-Jiménez R. and Ruiz-Jiménez M. C., (2020), Improving students’ satisfaction and learning performance using flipped classroom, Int. J. Manage. Educ., 18(3), 100422.
  36. Mooring S. R., Mitchell C. E. and Burrows N. L., (2016), Evaluation of a flipped, large-enrollment organic chemistry course on student attitude and achievement, J. Chem. Educ., 93(12), 1972–1983.
  37. Murillo-Zamorano L. R., Sánchez J. Á. L. and Godoy-Caballero A. L., (2019), How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: effects on students’ satisfaction, Comput. Educ., 141, 103608.
  38. Olakanmi E. E., (2017), The effects of a flipped classroom model of instruction on students’ performance and attitudes towards chemistry, J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 26, 127–137.
  39. Rahman T. and Lewis S. E., (2020), Evaluating the evidence base for evidence-based instructional practices in chemistry through meta-analysis, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 57(5), 765–793.
  40. Rebeiro G., Foster K., Hercelinskyj G. J. and Evans A., (2021), Enablers of the interpersonal relationship between registered nurses and students on clinical placement: a phenomenological study, Nurse Educ. Pract., 57, 103253.
  41. Reid S. A., (2016), A flipped classroom redesign in general chemistry, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17(4), 914–922.
  42. Reimer L. C., Denaro K., He W. and Link R. D., (2021), Getting students back on track: persistent effects of flipping accelerated organic chemistry on student achievement, study strategies, and perceptions of instruction, J. Chem. Educ., 98(4), 1088–1098.
  43. Rossi R. D., (2015), Confchem conference on flipped classroom: improving student engagement in organic chemistry using the inverted classroom model, J. Chem. Educ., 92(9), 1577–1579.
  44. Ryan M. D. and Reid S. A., (2016), Impact of the flipped classroom on student performance and retention: a parallel controlled study in general chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 93(1), 13–23.
  45. Ryan R. M. and Deci E. L., (2017), Self-determination Theory, Guilford Press.
  46. Schultz D., Duffield S., Rasmussen S. and Wageman J., (2014), Effects of the flipped classroom model on student performance for advanced placement high school chemistry students, J. Chem. Educ., 91(9), 1334–1339.
  47. Seery M. K., (2015), Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 16, 758–768.
  48. Shattuck J. C., (2016), A parallel controlled study of the effectiveness of a partially flipped organic chemistry course on student performance, perceptions, and course completion, J. Chem. Educ., 93(12), 1984–1992.
  49. Sookoo-Singh N. and Boisselle L. N., (2018), How does the “flipped classroom model” impact on student motivation and academic achievement in a chemistry classroom? Sci. Educ. Int., 29(4), 201–212.
  50. Strayer J. F., (2012), How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation, Learn. Environ. Res., 15(2), 171–193.
  51. Strelan P., Osborn A. and Palmer E., (2020), Student satisfaction with courses and instructors in a flipped classroom: a meta-analysis, J. Comput. Assist. Learn., 36(3), 295–314.
  52. Wubbels T., Den Brok P., Tartwijk J. V. and Levy J., (2012), Interpersonal relationships in education: an overview of contemporary research, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
  53. Yang B. and Zhang B., (2017), Study on comprehensive evaluation method of students’ problem solving ability, E-Educ. Res., 38(8), 24–30.
  54. Yelamarthi K. and Drake E., (2015), A flipped first-year digital circuits course for engineering and technology students, IEEE Trans. Educ., 58(3), 179–186.

Footnote

† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d2rp00339b
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2023
Click here to see how this site uses Cookies. View our privacy policy here.