Skip to main content

The impact of student engagement on learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course

Abstract

A cyber-flipped course was conducted with the flipped classroom pedagogy by using a wholly online approach for all learning activities in asynchronous and synchronous class sessions. Literature suggests that traditional flipped courses can effectively enhance students’ learning outcomes in comparison to non-flipped courses. However, conducting all asynchronous and synchronous learning activities using a wholly online approach has not been reported. This paper aimed to investigate how student engagement in four different types of learning activities affects their learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course. Results show that the learning activities with the flipped classroom pedagogy can be successfully implemented and conducted in a wholly online course along with time and space flexibility for learners. This study also found that students who watched more pre-recorded video lectures tended to participate in the synchronous learning activities more actively and obtained a higher semester grade; higher completion of asynchronous learning activities had benefited students’ understanding of the learning concepts. Furthermore, students who had a high level of readiness by attending synchronous class sessions on time and keeping their webcams activated had more frequent and proactive interactions with their peers and instructor.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2015). From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students’ creative thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology,46(6), 1133–1148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education,78, 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagat, K. K., Chang, C.-N., & Chang, C.-Y. (2016). The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,19(3), 134–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. Proceedings of ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA (vol. 30, pp. 1–18).

  • Brecht, H. (2012). Learning from online video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice,11, 227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE: Life Sciences Education,6(1), 9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P.-S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education,54(4), 1222–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., Wang, Y., & Chen, N.-S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education,79, 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopherson, K. M. (2011). Hardware or wetware: What are the possible interactions of pedagogy and technology in the classroom? Teaching of Psychology,38(4), 288–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, J. A., & Foley, J. D. (2006). Evaluating a web lecture intervention in a human–computer interaction course. IEEE Transactions on Education,49(4), 420–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, Y., Mehalik, M. M., Schunn, C. D., Silk, E., & Krysinski, D. (2008). Engagement and achievements: A case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education,19(2), 22–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, J. E. (2009). Learning in real time: Synchronous teaching and learning online. San Francisco: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flumerfelt, S., & Green, G. (2013). Using lean in the flipped classroom for at risk students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,16(1), 356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research,74(1), 59–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia Sanchez, C., Castro, F., Gomez, J. I., Tenllado, C., Chaver, D., & Lopez-Orozco, J. A. (2012). OpenIRS-UCM: An open-source multi-platform for interactive response systems. In Proceedings of Proceedings of the 17th ACM annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 232–237). ACM.

  • Geist, M. J., Larimore, D., Rawiszer, H., & Al Sager, A. W. (2015). Flipped versus traditional instruction and achievement in a baccalaureate nursing pharmacology course. Nursing Education Perspectives,36(2), 114–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior,47(1), 109–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (pp. 41–50). ACM.

  • He, W., Holton, A., Farkas, G., & Warschauer, M. (2016). The effects of flipped instruction on out-of-class study time, exam performance, and student perceptions. Learning and Instruction,45, 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2001). Computing experience and good practices in undergraduate education: Does the degree of campus wiredness matter? Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v9n49.2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (dis) engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education,43(5), 555–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, M.-L., Chou, C., Chen, C.-H., & Own, Z.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education,55(3), 1080–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G.-J., & Chiu-Lin, L. (2017). Facilitating and bridging out-of-class and in-class learning: An interactive E-book-based flipped learning approach for math courses. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,20(1), 184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamaludin, R., & Osman, S. Z. M. (2014). The use of a flipped classroom to enhance engagement and promote active learning. Journal of Education and Practice,5(2), 124–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education,14(1), ar5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakostas, A., Adam, D., Kioutsiouki, D., & Demetriadis, S. (2014). A pilot study of QuizIt: The new android classroom response system. In: Proceedings of 2014 International Conference on Interactive Mobile Communication Technologies and Learning (IMCL2014) (pp. 147–151). IEEE.

  • Kay, R., & Kletskin, I. (2012). Evaluating the use of problem-based video podcasts to teach mathematics in higher education. Computers & Education,59(2), 619–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education,22, 37–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laird, T. F. N., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). Student experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement. Research in Higher Education,46(2), 211–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, H., Jia, L., Gong, S.-H., & Clark, B. (2007). The relationship of Kolb learning styles, online learning behaviors and learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,10(4), 184–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBride, C. (2015). Flipping advice for beginners: What I learned flipping undergraduate mathematics and statistics classes. Primus,25(8), 694–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., et al. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education,77(9), 196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., et al. (2014). The flipped classroom: A course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine,89(2), 236–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, L. V., Finnegan, C., & Wu, S.-S. (2005). Tracking student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education,8(3), 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nachmias, R. (2002). A research framework for the study of a campus-wide Web-based academic instruction project. The Internet and Higher Education,5(3), 213–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education,25, 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Punie, Y. (2007). Learning Spaces: An ICT-enabled model of future learning in the Knowledge-based Society. European Journal of Education,42(2), 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafaeli, S., & Ravid, G. (1997). Online, web based learning environment for an information systems course: Access logs, linearity and performance. In Proceedings of ISECON (vol. 97, pp. 92–99). Citeseer.

  • Rambe, P., & Bere, A. (2013). Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology. British Journal of Educational Technology,44(4), 544–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2013). The future of learning 2025: Developing a vision for change. Future Learning,2(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, K. A., & Su, S. (2012). Interest and its development The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 167–187). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T., Long, G. L., & Foster, S. B. (2004). Academic engagement in students with a hearing loss in distance education. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,9(1), 68–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. C., & Newby, T. (2006). The role of students’ cognitive engagement in online learning. American Journal of Distance Education,20(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education,17, 74–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business,84(2), 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College Teaching,59(2), 56–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, Y., Jong, M. S., Chang, M., & Chen, W. (2017). Guest editorial: “How” to design, implement and evaluate the flipped classroom? A synthesis. Educational Technology & Society,20(1), 180–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research,15(2), 171–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J. C.-Y., & Wu, Y.-T. (2016). Analysis of learning achievement and teacher–student interactions in flipped and conventional classrooms. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,17(1), 79–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us. Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction,4(1), 13–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L. K. (1990). Understanding managers’ media choices: A symbolic interactionist organizations and communication technology (p. 71). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, Y.-H., Lee, L.-H., Chien, Y.-T., Chang, C.-Y., & Li, T.-Y. (2018). Multilingual short text responses clustering for mobile educational activities: A preliminary exploration. In Proceedings of Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Natural Language Processing Techniques for Educational Applications (pp. 157–164).

  • Wang, F. H. (2017). An exploration of online behaviour engagement and achievement in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. Computers & Education,114, 79–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, C.-W., Chen, N.-S., & Kinshuk, (2012). A model for social presence in online classrooms. Educational Technology Research and Development,60(3), 529–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9234-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Milrad, M., Ke, H. R., & Huang, Y. M. (2012). An innovative concept map approach for improving students’ learning performance with an instant feedback mechanism. British Journal of Educational Technology,43(2), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, M., Ren, J., Custer, S., & Coleman, J. (2010). Hands-on summer camp to attract K–12 students to engineering fields. IEEE Transactions on Education,53(1), 144–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaiane, O. R., & Luo, J. (2001). Towards evaluating learners’ behaviour in a web-based distance learning environment. In Proceedings of Advanced Learning Technologies, 2001. Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on (pp. 357–360). IEEE.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C., for financially supporting this research under Grant Nos. MOST-107-2511-H-224-007-MY3, MOST-106-2511-S-224-005-MY3, and MOST 106-2917-I-564-065.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nian-Shing Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, LC., Hung, IC., Kinshuk et al. The impact of student engagement on learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course. Education Tech Research Dev 67, 1573–1591 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09698-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09698-9

Keywords

  • Cyber-flipped course
  • Synchronous learning activities
  • Engagements
  • Online interaction
  • Learning outcomes