How Does The “Flipped Classroom Model” Impact On Student Motivation And Academic Achievement In A Chemistry Classroom?
Abstract
This action research was completed as a module on an in-service teacher education program and addressed form four (year 10, students aged 14–15 years old) students’ demotivation to study chemistry on the Caribbean island of Trinidad. My students often find chemistry challenging, and I suspect that teacher-centered methods probably contribute to their experience. The flipped classroom model was selected based on a review of the literature which identified it as a student-centered method with potential to impact both motivation and academic achievement. The research considered the flipped classroom’s impact on students’ motivation, academic performance, and perceptions of the intervention itself. The study was conducted over 4 weeks, and lessons were delivered asynchronously through the use of various Information Communication Technology resources such as email, websites, powerpoint presentations, and videos. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Within the limitations of this study, academic achievement was not significantly impacted; student motivation was positively and significantly affected; and most students’ perception of the intervention was favorable though some indicated a preference for in-class lectures. Findings suggest further research into the utility of a blended method of synchronous and asynchronous lectures.References
References
AkbaÅŸ, A. & Kaan, A. (2007). Affective factors that influence chemistry achievement (motivation and anxiety) and the power of these factors to predict chemistry achievement. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 10-20.
Altermatt, B. (2014). Threats to internal validity for within-subjects designs. Retrieved from http://vault.hanover.edu/~altermattw/courses/220/readings/Within_subjects.pdf
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Barlia, L. (1999). High school students’ motivation to engage in conceptual change-learning in science (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ohio State University, USA.
Britner, S. L., & Pajares, P. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499. doi: 10.1002/tea.20131
Britner, S.L., & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271 –285.
Brophy, J. (1998). Motivating students to learn. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Caribbean Examinations Council. (2013). Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) Chemistry syllabus. St. Michael, Barbados: Author.
Cavas, P. (2011). Factors affecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Education International, 22(1), 31-42
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, D. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Culp, K., Hawkins, J., & Honey, M. (1999). Review paper on educational technology research and development. New York, NY: Education Development Center, Center for Children and Technology.
Franciszkowicz, M. (2008). Video-based Additional Instruction. Journal of the Research Center for Educational technology, 4(2), 5-14.
Fulton, K. (2012). Inside the flipped classroom. The Journal. Retrieved from http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/04/11/the-flipped-classroom.aspx
Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science Motivation Questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159–1176.
Green, G. (2012). The flipped classroom and school approach: Clintondale High School. Paper presented at The Annual Building Learning Communities Education Conference, Boston, MA.
Haury, D., & Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives of hands-on science teaching. The ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED372926).
Johnson, G. B. (2013). Students Perceptions of the Flipped Classroom (Unpublished master’s disstertation). University of British Columbia, Canada.
Jonassen, D. H. (1993). Thinking technology: Context is everything. Educational Technology, 31(6), 35–37.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30-35.
Kirch, C. (2012). Flipping with Kirch. Retrieved from http://flippingwithkirch.blogspot.ca/p/2011-2012-test-score-data.html
Knewton. (2012). The flipped classroom infographic: A new method of teaching is turning the traditional classroom on its head. Retrieved from http://www.knewton.com/flipped-classroom/
Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Pub.
Nugent, G. C., Soh, L., & Samal, A. (2006). Development and validation of learning objects. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 34, 271-281
O'Neil, K., Kelly, T. & Bone, S. (2012). We Turned Learning On Its Ear: Flipping the Developmental Classroom. In: T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2012 (pp. 2752-2756). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Prosser, M. and Trigwell, K. (1998). Teaching for learning in higher education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London, UK: Routledge.
Rhodes, L. K., & Bellamy, T. (1999). Choices and consequences in the reform of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 50(1), 17-26.
Roach, J. (2006). Using screen capture technology to develop on-line course material. In: C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 519-520). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Ross, K. (2005). Module 3: Sample design for educational survey research. Paris, France: International Institute for Education Planning/UNESCO.
Salta, K., & Koulougliotis, D. (2012, March). Students’ motivation to learn chemistry: The Greek case. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference New Perspectives in Science Education, Florence, Italy (pp. 8-9).
Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Sezer, R. (2010). Pulling out All the Stops. Education, 130(3), 416-423
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Shell, D.F., Colvin, C., & Bruning, R.H. (1995). Self-efficacy, attribution, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement-level differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 386 –398. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.386
Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement.
The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323-332.
Slavin, R. (2007). Educational research in the age of accountability. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Trinidad and Tobago. Ministry of Education. (2008). Secondary Education Modernisation Programme (SEMP). Secondary School Curriculum: Forms 1-3. Couva, Trinidad and Tobago: Ministry of Education. Curriculum Planning and Development Division.
