An Investigation of the Impact of a Flipped Classroom Instructional Approach on High School Students’ Content Knowledge and Attitude Toward the Learning Environment.

The idea of the “flipped classroom” has become increasingly popular in education. However, very little research in how “flipped classrooms” impact high school students’ ability to perform on exams has been done. The purpose of this research is to add to the body of knowledge and help provide data to investigate how well students learn physics content by using the flipped classroom in a high school Physics with Technology class. Seven periods of Physics with Technology at Lone Peak High School in Highland, UT were used in this study. Three of the classes were randomly assigned to be “flipped” while the other four were taught using what is considered a “traditional” method of instruction of physics (guided inquiry). The pacing and content was matched each day and all classes participated in the same labs, homework, quizzes and tests. The defining difference is the method which the content was covered. The flipped classes watched video lectures at home to learn the majority of the content, then did what is traditionally known as “homework” in class with the teacher present to help. In this study, it was found that there was no statistically or practically significant difference in mean test scores for the first three units. Student responses on a survey also showed very little statistical difference in the students’ attitudes towards the classroom environment in either instructional method. INTRODUCTION Students frequently believe they fully understand a topic while it is being covered in class, but actually do not (Willingham 2003). Research shows that two factors are especially important in causing this disparity: (1) the students’ “familiarity” with a topic and (2) the students’ “partial access” to information (Willingham 2003). Vol.7, Issue 5, Apr-2020 Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) 339 “Familiarity” is when a person or a topic appears to be familiar to an individual, even though the source of the familiarity is unknown. “Partial Access” is when an individual knows something about part of the topic. For example, a student might be asked a question that they do not know the answer to, but some related information comes to mind, which would make them think that they would recognize the correct answer if they could see it. A big problem with both “familiarity” and “partial access” in the classroom is that students may think they already understand the topic being taught, so they mentally shut down, which prohibits them from fully learning the topic (Willingham 2003). The students may then go home feeling confident in their knowledge, only to find out too late that they cannot complete their homework since they do not have the adequate comprehension. At this point, the teacher is not available to help answer any questions the student may have. Although there have been many methods employed to address this issue, such as varying teaching styles, one contemporary instructional technique called: Flipped Classrooms, has garnered popularity over the past 8 years. It has become popular because it suggests a sublte but important difference in instructional design, moving the dissemination of information to “homebased” efforts, where “in-class” efforts focus rather on lab and what was traditional “home-work” experiences. Nonetheless, despite its popularity there is limited research documenting its impact on student performance – specially in high school classrooms. Note, for the duration of the paper the term: “traditional classroom” will refer to any teaching style where students come to class and the teacher presents content for the students to learn, and the students then practice what they were taught in school at home. Flipping the classroom (a.k.a “flipped classroom,” “flipped learning,” or “inverted learning”) is a teaching strategy that reverses the role of the classroom instruction and out-ofclass homework. Students are provided instructional materials before class, which commonly involves a video lecture the teacher prepared in advance (Overmeyer, 2012). The students are required to watch the videos at home and take notes just as they would be expected to do during a classroom lecture. The students then come to class with a basic understanding of the content knowledge from the video and complete what is traditionally known as “homework” in class in collaboration with the teacher. Goodwin (2013) stated, “To date there is no scientific research base to indicate exactly how well flipped classrooms work. ” The problem with understanding and accepting the flipped classroom as a valid method of instruction is that there has been little research done on the effectiveness of students’ learning when using a flipped classroom model. The purpose of this research was to add to the body of knowledge and help provide data investigating student attitudes about using flipped classrooms, and how well students learn physics content by using a flipped classroom model in a high school physics class. Research Questions Two research questions were investigated to address the research purpose. The questions are listed below: 1. Will exam scores of students in a flipped high school physics class differ statistically and practically from exam scores of students in a traditionally taught high school physics class when tested on content knowledge? Bell, M. , Shumway, S. & Wright, G. (2020) An Investigation of the Impact of a Flipped Classroom Instructional Approach on High School Students’ Content Knowledge and Attitude Toward the Learning Environment. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(5) 338-349. URL: http://dx.doi. org/10.14738/assrj.75. 8259 340 2. How will students’ attitudes about learning and classroom environment differ between students in a flipped classroom from students in a traditional classroom? METHODOLOGY Seven periods of Physics with Technology (PwT) with approximately 28-32 students in each class participated in the study. Students in PwT consist mostly of sophomores (approximately 85%), with some juniors (10%) and seniors (5%). Four of the PwT classes were taught using traditional methods and three of the PwT’s were taught using the flipped classroom. It was not possible to randomly assign students to different classes since students can select which courses to take. However, the classes can be considered quasi-randomly assigned since the computer that assigns classes uses an algorithm to place students in classes based on class sizes and availability. Although the individual students cannot be completely randomly assigned to a specific group, the classes were randomly assigned to either the control group or the treatment group by flipping a coin. The Force Concept Inventory (FCI), a nationally accepted standard to measure students’ comprehension of conceptual physics, was given to the students before instruction began to establish a baseline for each class period’s entry level knowledge. The FCI was not used as a final exam since the three units taught during the research time does not cover sufficient information to see a noticeable difference in test scores. Instead, it was used to establish the baseline to compare and confirm t h a t each period had similar average initial physics content knowledge at the start of the study. Students in the treatment and control group were also compared by using their overall GPA prior to entering the physics class. Their overall GPA was the best method available to the researchers to compare students’ previous study habits and learning aptitude. For example, if the average GPA for each class was comparable, we could assume that the students had similar baselines in educational aptitude and work ethic, and would perform equally well in their physics class if conditions were similar. Three class periods were randomly assigned to participate in the treatment group as the classes that would be flipped. The flipped classes were told to watch the video lessons before class. A quiz about the video content was given online. The students had to complete the quiz before coming to class. The quiz scores were used to monitor which students watched the videos on time. At the beginning of class, the instructor led a class discussion, beginning with any questions the students had. The instructor was careful not to simply review the material in the video lesson again. The purpose of the discussion was not to give a complete review of the topic covered (although by talking about the subject, that automatically does become a review in and of itself), but to get feedback on what was not understood, or to give deeper explanations. Students then completed their “homework” in class in groups or partners with the teacher available to help, as well as work on labs or perform demonstrations of the concepts taught in the video. The control group was four class periods that were taught using a teaching style that is commonly used to teach high school physics. This method primarily uses guided inquiry (i.e., students explore concepts by being engaged in hands-on labs that demonstrate concepts being studied before any formal lecture is given). Following the labs and activities, classroom discussions were led by the teacher to help refine and expand upon principles learned by the labs or activities. Students also Vol.7, Issue 5, Apr-2020 Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) 341 learned from demonstrations, lectures, discussions, and small group work. Students were then assigned homework problems that were similar to the problems and concepts learned in class that day. The following class period, students were administered a quiz to evaluate understanding on the previous day’s content. Content for both the control group and the flipped group was paced to match each day. All assignments, labs, activities, etc. that were recorded as part of students’ scores were identical for both the control and treatment group. The instructor performing the experiment has experienc