To Flip or Not to Flip?
Selecting the Best Approach for Your Classroom
The decision to adopt a flipped classroom model or stick with traditional methods is pivotal for educators seeking effective ways to impart new material. However, the suitability of each approach varies greatly across grade level, subject matter, and most importantly, socioeconomic status of the student body. How do you decide which one suits your needs and the needs of your students best? I will address this question through the examination of existing research, and assess the effectiveness of these methods in different types of secondary classrooms.
Before evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of these alternative models, it is important to remember that:
Neither method will work in the absence of high quality instruction;
The number of learning experiences afforded to a student should remain the same for both—it’s a matter of which learning experiences occur in the classroom, and which occur outside, that should differ. This does not mean that the number of learning experiences a teacher provides has no bearing on student achievement, but that’s an entirely separate discussion worthy of its own article!
The Flipped Classroom Model
In flipped classrooms, content acquisition occurs outside of the classroom, and content application occurs within. Students in this type of classroom are introduced to new concepts independently via pre-recorded lectures, and use class time to engage with the material under the close guidance of their teacher. Advocates of this student-centered approach believe that class time should be centered around active learning experiences that require high-order thinking, rather than the passive delivery of content.
Photo Credit: Evan-Amos | Student using class time to engage in a highly interactive dissection lab
According to The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, some of the benefits of a flipped classroom model include:
More Flexibility: Students can schedule their learning around personal commitments, do it at their own pace, and have the opportunity to rewatch as needed.
Increased Student Responsibility: Students become active participants in their learning, enhancing personal accountability.
Increased Classroom Productivity: Class time focuses on active learning rather than the passive delivery of information available elsewhere and/or in other formats.
More Learning Opportunities: Increased class time availability offers higher-level learning opportunities.
More One-on-One Help: Students have more opportunities to build relationships with their teachers and receive individualized instruction.
More Student Collaboration Opportunities: More opportunities for collaborative learning enhances peer-to-peer education.
While there are a number of benefits to adopting this model, it has a few noteworthy drawbacks that are especially relevant when considering its use in an urban high school classroom—more on this later! Based on personal experience and expert knowledge, some of the drawbacks of this method include:
Dependency on Student Responsibility: Effective implementation assumes students will watch the lecture(s) and take necessary notes prior to attending class.
Requires Student Preparedness: Organized in-class learning activities are only possible if most or all of the students come to class prepared, which may not always be the case.
Inability to Make Adjustments: Pre-recorded lectures interfere with an instructor's ability to make immediate and necessary adjustments to their lesson based on real-time feedback.
Requires Notetaking Skills: Students must already know how to effectively notetake without guidance.
May Require a Larger Buy-In: Implementation may be difficult, and pushback strong, if the decision to adopt this model is not made at an administrative level.
The Traditional Classroom Approach
In traditional classrooms, content acquisition occurs during class time, whereas content application occurs outside. Students in this type of classroom take notes while listening to an instructor-led lecture, then independently apply the information after class via assigned homework. While there are some benefits to traditional lectures (which we will discuss below), most of the literature on the subject argues against the effectiveness of this teacher-centered approach to learning, as it has not been shown to improve student achievement to the same degree as other models.
Photo Credit: Jü | College professor lecturing
While there are numerous issues with this model, recognizing its strengths are important when evaluating the most effective way to present new information to students. Based on personal experience and expert knowledge, some of the benefits of this method include:
Ensured Content Acquisition: In-person content acquisition ensures all present students receive the knowledge necessary for application.
Less Dependency on Student Preparedness: Completion of assigned extracurricular learning tasks has less bearing on whether scheduled in-class activities can proceed as planned.
Less Dependency on Note-Taking Skills: Guidance during in-person lectures and students’ ability to ask questions in real-time reduces the need for advanced note-taking skills.
Opportunity for Immediate Feedback: Live lectures afford students the opportunity to gain immediate clarity via Q&A; and provide instructors with the feedback necessary to make adjustments to their lecture when needed.
Increased Student Engagement: Live lectures can encourage active attention and frequently stimulate class discussions, improving information retention.
As was previously mentioned, this approach has numerous drawbacks, which has prompted experts to discourage its exclusive use. Based on personal experience and expert knowledge, some of the drawbacks of this method include:
Dependency on Attendance: Absent students miss out on crucial information, making the successful completion of application tasks (homework) difficult.
Limited Flexibility: Live lectures prevent students from being able to rewind and/or rewatch when needed.
Fails to Meet Varied Learner Needs: Most traditional lectures meet only the needs of auditory learners.
Reduced Individualized Help: Teacher inaccessibility hinders one-on-one support, requiring students to seek help outside of class.
Increased Dependence on Peers: Students may rely on peers instead of independent problem-solving.
Limits Interactive Learning Opportunities: Teacher-centered format reduces peer interactions during class.
Adaptations of this model are often seen in primary and secondary classrooms throughout the United States. Unlike its use in post-secondary classrooms (we all remember those, dare I say boring, lecture halls), traditional setups in these classrooms usually include the following:
Short Lectures: A short period of time designated each day (or most days) to a teacher-led lecture.
In-Class Content Application: Designated work time in which students apply the content independently or in groups.
Extracurricular Content Application: A short period of time designated each day (or some days) to the completion of an application task (homework) outside of the classroom.
What Does the Literature Say?
Many publications on the flipped classroom model examine its effectiveness in post-secondary university classrooms. The findings of these studies suggest that its use in this setting increases test scores as well as students’ overall satisfaction with their course (Mazur, 2009; Meyer, 2013; Han, 2022). While these studies highlight potential benefits of using such a model, the findings are not entirely generalizable to learners in primary and secondary classrooms, as their needs and circumstances are different. So, what does it look like when implemented into these classrooms, and is it as successful at these levels, as it is at the post-secondary?
Pioneers of the flipped classroom model, Johnathan Bergman and Aaron Sams, have authored a number of publications since the successful flip of their high school chemistry classrooms nearly 20 years ago. In their books, “Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day” and “Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement,” they discuss in great detail, the reasons for which they developed this model, and its success in not only their classrooms, but many others around the world. However, it's worth noting that while Bergman and Sams make mention of its successful use in classrooms across varying disciplines, they most frequently cite its applicability in math courses.
Additionally, what I find even more interesting about the successful case examples Bergman and Sams highlight in their book, “Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement,” is that the students served in every case are largely considered to be of high socioeconomic status (SES). Being that they are of high SES, they have significantly more access to “financial, educational, social, and health resources” than persons of low SES. The absence of case examples highlighting the successful implantation of the flipped model in urban and rural classrooms (which serve largely marginalized, low SES communities), draws questions as to whether this approach is as successful in these contexts.
While more uncommon, there are studies seeking answers to these questions. One, in particular, sought to determine whether the flipped classroom model had any effect on the motivation or academic achievement of urban high school students. The researcher assessed this experimentally via the use of a “pretest-posttest non-equivalent group design.” They selectively split a 12th grade anatomy and physiology class into two groups: a control group, which acquired content traditionally; and an experimental group, which acquired content independently, outside of the classroom. Their findings suggest that the use of the flipped classroom model may have no significant effect on the motivation or academic achievement of students in urban classrooms.
In another interesting article posted on Edutopia, which examines the strengths and weaknesses of the flipped model, author Mary Beth Hertz suggests that effective implantation may not be possible in all classrooms. She explained that many urban school teachers find its implementation difficult in their classrooms because like her, their students don’t always have reliable access to the required technologies. However, despite these warranted concerns, there is a Title I high school just north of Detroit, MI, who attributes its students' improved test scores to the school-wide implementation of this learning model. Clintondale High School, who serves predominantly low-income, minority students, said that prior to adopting this model, their school was ranked in the bottom 5% of all high schools in Michigan. This case makes me wonder, to what degree does the successful implementation of the flipped model in urban classrooms depend on school and district wide initiatives?
Conclusion
Whether an educator should adopt a flipped model, stick with traditional methods, or incorporate aspects of both into their classroom is largely dependent on the grade level, subject matter, and socioeconomic status of the students they serve. However, finding the best approach should be of particular importance for teachers working with students in marginalized, urban communities, who have historically been deprived of access to high quality educational experiences, and are in need of more resources than their high SES counterparts. If you are interested in learning more about which approach I take in my urban classroom, click here!
Check Out Our Store!
Interested in the resources I use to make learning accessible to all students in my classroom? We are in the process of making our biology curriculum available, one unit at a time! Check back in on August 5th when “Unit 1: Macromolecules” becomes available.
References
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement. International Society for Technology in Education.
Dixon, K. L. (2017). The effect of the flipped classroom on urban high school students’ motivation and academic achievement in a high school science course [Doctoral Dissertation, Liberty University]. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2422&context=doctoral
Fritz, M. (2013, December 5). How one school turned homework on its head with ‘flipped’ instruction. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/what-does-a-flipped-classroom-look-like-2
Han, S. (2022). Flipped classroom: Challenges and benefits of using social media in English language teaching and learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 996294. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.996294
Hertz, M. B. (2015, December 22). The flipped classroom: Pro and con. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/flipped-classroom-pro-and-con-mary-beth-hertz
Lesley University. (n.d.). An introduction to flipped learning. https://lesley.edu/article/an-introduction-to-flipped-learning
Mazur, E. (2009, January 2). Farewell, lecture? Science, 323, 50-51. doi:10.1126/science.1168927
Meyer, R. (2013, September 13). The post-lecture classroom: How will students fare? The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/the-post-lecture-classroom-how-will-students-fare/279663/
NIH: National Cancer Institute. (n.d.). Socioeconomic status. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/socioeconomic-status
The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). Flipped classrooms. Harvard University. https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/flipped-classrooms
The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning. (n.d.). Lecturing. Harvard University. https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/lecturing
#flippedclassroom #flippingtheclassroom #reverseclassroom #technologyineducation #traditionalmodel #traditionallecture #lecturing #lecturehall #seminar #highschoolclassroom #urbanteaching #suburbanteaching #highschoolteaching #secondaryschool #primaryschool #post-secondary #learning
