Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
and their Effects on Student Effort and ProficiencyAdrian LeisMiyagi University of Education
Flipped Classrooms
@adrianleis
AdrianLeis
adrianleis.weebly.com
JALTCALL 2015June 7, 2015
Today’s Menu .
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• This Study
• Results and Discussion
• Conclusions
• Discussion
Introduction
In class At home
Listen to teacher explain the text
Do practice exercises Write compositions
Do practice exercises Write compositions
Listen to teacher explain the text
Helpful for teaching deaf and hard-of-hearing students (subtitles in videos) Subtitles help regular students as well All students gave positive feedback when flipping my English composition classes
At home In class Regular Class Flipped Class
Literature review - Flipped method
Salman Khan (2012)
• Khan Academy • All people learn and concentrate in
different ways and at different times • Teachers must provide opportunities for
students to study anytime and anywhere
Strayer (2007)
• Ph.D Dissertation - Flipped method in Math • Tasks in flipped learning need to be simple,
or students may get lost • However, there was an increase in
innovation and cooperation in the classroom
Davies et al. (2013)
• ICT class at university • Regular method makes it difficult to
provide individualized instruction • Flipped learning allows personalized
instruction and feedback
Moraris et al. (2015)
• 67 graduate students • Students were satisfied with the flipped
method • Perceived effects did not reflect grades
Literature review - Individual Instruction
Morton (1960)
• Using language laboratories enables students to receive individual instruction
• Language laboratories help late-comers to join in the class smoothly
Davies et al. (2013)
• ICT class at university • Regular method makes it difficult to
provide individualized instruction • Flipped learning allows personalized
instruction and feedback
Baker (2000)
• More instructors are attempting to create an environment which is more student-centered, allowing more active learning
Keefe (2007)
• The principal goal of education is to get students to learn
• Teachers must create an environment in which they can provide personalized coaching
Literature review - Flipped method in EFL
Cowie and Sakui (2014)
• Discuss blended learning in Australasian and Asian context • Flipped learning allows students to access classroom content
in a way that cannot be replicated in traditional classrooms
Ishikawa et al. (2014)
• Effects of flipped learning on coaching for proficiency tests • Students indicated high satisfaction with the flipped method • Students displayed high confidence of achieving high
scores in proficiency tests
Mehring (2015)
• Doctorate focusing on flipped learning in EFL classes in northern Japan
• Flipped learning increased the responsibility students felt to be more active in classes
• This is vital in the traditionally passive classrooms seen in Japan (see Aspinall, 2006; Nakata, 2006).
This study - Research Questions
RQ 1. Do students in a flipped classroom environment show more effort in their studies in comparison to students in a regular classroom?
RQ 2. Do students in a flipped classroom environment show a greater increase in proficiency in comparison to students in a regular classroom?
RQ 3. What can we learn from the dynamics of student effort in the flipped group?
This study - Participants
Group Age (SD)
Gender University Major
Female Male English Other
Flipped 19.36(.92) 8 3 8 3
Regular 19.73(.47) 11 0 11 0
This study - Procedure
Week 1 Pretest
English composition
classes using either the flipped method or regular method
Week 10 Posttest & Questionnaire
Flipped Group 20 Greetings & Dictogloss
10 Q&A of video content
55 Composition writing
5 Confirming preparation for
next class
Regular Group 20 Greetings & Dictogloss
45 Textbook explanation
20 Composition writing
5 Confirming deadline
preparation for next class
Watching videoed explanation Preparing compositions
Completing compositions Feedback from teacher
Feedback from teacher
Results - RQ 1 (Study time)
Before class Flipped Group(M = 122.74, SD = 51.01) > Regular Group
(M = 49.09, SD = 9.29) t(20) = 4.10, p < .001, d = 2.01
After class Flipped Group(M = 46.36, SD = 24.61) ≈ Regular Group
(M = 43.63, SD = 36.41) t(20) = .21, p = .839
Total time Flipped Group(M = 169.09, SD = 70.06) > Regular Group
(M = 92.73, SD = 63.58) t(20) = 2.67, p = .014, d = 1.14
Note. Results are based on independent samples t tests
See Appendix A for a more detailed
statistical report
Results - RQ 1 (Number of words)
Note. Results are based on paired-samples t tests
Pretest Flipped Group(M = 134.73, SD = 39.42) ≈ Regular Group
(M = 133.45, SD = 38.50) t(10) = .06, p = .954
Posttest Flipped Group(M = 260.45, SD = 70.06) > Regular Group
(M = 162.50, SD = 76.75) t(10) = 3.37, p = .007, d = 1.44
See Appendix B for a more detailed
statistical report
Results - RQ 1 (Effort)
Yes!
• The Flipped Group had been given a clearer indication of how to prepare for class. • The Flipped Group were able to access the lesson video anywhere and anytime,
increasing their opportunities to study. • The Flipped Group showed signs of autonomy, by reviewing their compositions and
considering ways to improve.
“I prefer to define autonomy as the capacity to take control of one’s learning, largely because the contrast of control appears to be more open to investigation than the constructs of charge or responsibility (Benson, 2001, p. 47)”
Results - RQ 2 Results - RQ 2
See Appendix C for a more detailed
statistical report
Results - RQ 2
Despite there being a statistical difference in proficiency in the pretest, a comparison can still be conducted using a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) (see Larson-Hall, 2010, 2008; Lyster, 2004). Results showed the Flipped Method to be significantly more effective in increasing proficiency than a regular approach to teaching, F (1, 63) = 13.50, p < .001, η2 = .18.
Strength η2
Strong > .14
Medium 0.06
Weak 0.01(Green & Salkind, 2011, p. 213)
Effect size strength for ANCOVA
See Appendix D for a more detailed
report
Results - RQ 2
Yes!
• The subtitles provided in the flipped classroom videos improved students’ understanding of the content.
• Because students were able to access the videos anytime, they could watch the class as many times as they needed to understand the content.
• As the explanation of the lesson had already been conducted online, the instructor was able to provide individual and personalised instruction to students in the Flipped Group.
Results - RQ 3
Complex Dynamic Systems in L2 Motivation research
Several theories suggest motivation is not static, but ever-changing, measurable under a multitude of rubrics (Dörnyei, et al. 2015):
Chaos Theory (Larsen-Freeman, 1997) Emergentism (Ellis & Larsen-Freeman, 2006) Dynamic Systems Theory (de Bot, et al., 2007) Complexity Theory (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008)
There is a need for more empirical studies to support the
dynamic systems approach to L2 motivation research (Dörnyei, et al. 2015)
We must not forget the value of pre-posttest designed research as well.
(Noels, 2014)
Results - RQ 3
See Appendix E for a more detailed
report
Note. χ2 (9, N = 9) = 40.74, p < .001, W = .503.
Results - RQ 3
Related to the Hawthorn Effect? (Ur, 2013)
• We may expect immediate results, but these could slowly decrease over the course
• Providing concrete number of entries/items seems to encourage more writing
Conclusions
Using the flipped classroom method increases the initial
workload for teachers
Using the flipped classroom method increases effort made by students
Using the flipped classroom method increases students’
proficiency
Flipped classroom videos with subtitles improve understanding of
content
Flipped classroom videos on video-sharing websites allow viewing anytime anywhere
Conclusions - Future directions
Effects of the flipped method on motivation of students in discussion-based/conversation classes. Increasing peer-coaching in flipped classes
Flipped Group 20 Greetings & Dictogloss
10 Q&A of video content
55 Peer-coaching
5 Confirming preparation for
next class
Watching videoed explanation Writing compositions
Feedback from teacher
ReferencesAspinall, R. W. (2006, July). Using the paradigm of ‘small cultures’ to explain policy failure in the case of foreign language education in Japan. In Japan Forum (Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 255-274). Taylor & Francis Group. Baker, J. W. (2000). The" classroom flip": Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side. In Selected Papers from the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and
Learning, 9-17. Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow: Pearson Education. Cowie, N., & Sakui, K. (2014). Take your pick: Out-of-class, blended language and Web 2.0 projects, and online. JALTCALL Journal 10(3), 273-286. 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. de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. H. (2007). A Dynamic Systems Theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 10(1), 7-21. Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. & Henry, A. (2015). Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Ellis, N. C. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics – Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics 27(4), 558-589. Green, S., & Salkind, N. (2011). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Boston: Prentice Hall Press. Ishikawa, Y., Akahane-Yamada, R., Smith, C., Tsubota, Y., & Dantsuji, M. (2014). Flipped learning in a university EFL course: Helping students improve their TOEIC scores. INTED2014 Proceedings, 5860-5867. Keefe, J. (2007). What is personalization? Phi Delta Kappan, 83(6), 440-448. Khan, S. (2012). The one world schoolhouse: Education reimagined. New York: Twelve. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18, 141-165. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York: Routledge. Larson-Hall, J. (2008). Weighing the benefits of studying a foreign language at a younger starting age in a minimal input situation. Second Language Research, 24(1), 35-63. Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(4), 399-432. Mehring, J. G. (2015). An exploratory study of the lived experiences of Japanese undergraduate EFL students in the flipped classroom. (Doctoral dissertation, Pepperdine University). Moraros, J., Islam, A., Yu, S., Banow, R., & Schindelka, B. (2015). Flipping for success: evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting. BMC Medical Education, 15(1), 27. Morton, F. (1960). The language laboratory as a teaching machine. International Journal of American Linguistics 26, 113-166. Nakata, Y. (2006). Motivation and experience in foreign language learning. Bern: Peter Lang. Noels, K. (2014, August). Round table discussion conducted at International Conference on Motivational Dynamics and Second Language Acquisition, Nottingham. Strayer, J. F. (2007). The effects of the classroom flip on the learning environment: A comparison of learning activity in a traditional classroom and a flip classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University). Ur, P. (2013, October). A voyage of discovery. Plenary presented at JALT2013: Learning is a Lifelong Voyage, Kobe.
Appendix A
Group Before (SD) 95%CI After
(SD) 95%CI Total (SD) 95%CI
Flipped 122.74**(51.01)
[88.46, 156.99] 46.36(24.61)
[29.83, 62.89] 169.09*(70.06)
[122.02, 216.16]
Regular 49.09(9.29)
[28.39, 69.79] 43.36(36.41)
[19.18, 68.09] 92.73(63.58)
[50.02, 135.44]
Note. Before: the number of minutes studied before class; After: the number of minutes studied after class; Total: the total minutes of hours studied; * p <.05; ** p < .001.
Results - RQ 1 (Study time)
Appendix B
Group Before (SD) 95%CI After
(SD) 95%CI
Flipped 134.73(39.42) [108.25, 161.21] 260.45*
(49.30) [227.33, 293.57]
Regular 133.45(38.50) [107.60, 159.32] 162.50
(76.75) [115.81, 218.92]
Note. Before: the number of minutes studied before class; After: the number of minutes studied after class; Total: the total minutes of hours studied; * p <.01.
Results - RQ 1 (Number of words)
Appendix C
Group Pretest (SD) 95%CI Posttest
(SD) 95%CI
Flipped 11.09(3.19) [9.96, 12.22] 15.55*
(4.44) [13.97, 17.12]
Regular 7.67(2.73) [6.70, 8.63] 9.70*
(3.88) [8.32, 11.07]Note. Results are based on paired-samples t tests; * p < .001; Max: 25, Min: 0.
Results - RQ 2 (Proficiency changes within groups)
Appendix D
Group Pretest Posttest 95%CI
Flipped 9.38 14.67* [13.20, 16.14]
Regular 9.38 10.57 [9.10, 12.04]Note. Results are based on ANCOVA; * p < .001; Max: 25, Min: 0.
Results - RQ 2 (Proficiency changes within groups)
Appendix E
Note. Results are based on a Friedman Test; χ2 (9, N = 9) = 40.74, p < .001, W = .503.
Results - RQ 3 (Dynamics of effort within the Flipped Group)No. Topic Words1 The effects of technology on the environment. 134.732 Write three diary entries about the daily life of a Japanese university student. 291.273 Report on an interview with your partner about one aspect of his/her university life. 313.894 Describe three smartphone applications that are popular for university students. 331.645 Describe three unusual Japanese foods. 317.366 Write a recipe for a food you can cook well. 295.647 Describe five items of a field you are interested in (e.g., musicians, animals). 356.278 Choose one of the items you described in Topic 7 and give a more detailed description. 287.649 Write diary entries for three days past week. 266.8010 The effects of technology on the environment 260.45
Adrian LeisMiyagi University of Education
@adrianleis
AdrianLeis
adrianleis.weebly.com
JALTCALL 2015June 7, 2015
Thank you for your time
