Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 391–407 | Cite as

To flip or not to flip: social science faculty members’ concerns about flipping the classroom

  • Morris Siu-Yung JongEmail author


Flipped Classroom (FC) is a blended learning approach being promoted in higher education in recent years. It flips the conventional pedagogic arrangement so that students use the out-of-class time to conduct lower-order learning and the in-class time to conduct higher-order learning. Nevertheless, unlike the adoption phenomena in other academic disciplines such as Science, Engineering, Medicine and Education in university teaching, the adoption of FC in Social Science has been rare. This paper reports on a quantitative study (n = 152) in which the Stages of Concern model was employed to probe into the concerns of Social Science faculty members (SSFMs) about introducing FC into their teaching practice. The study reveals that the participants were having strong categorical concerns of “Information” and “Management.” The findings shed light on designing more precise interventions for addressing SSFMs’ actual needs when flipping their classrooms, providing a useful reference for researchers and practitioners who are pursuing work on promoting FC in higher education.


Flipped classroom Stages of concern Social science faculty members Blended learning Higher education 



Thank you very much to all SSFMs who participated in the present study, especially the five SSFMs who participated in the focus group interview.


  1. Alammary, A., Sheard, J., & Carbone, A. (2014). Blended learning in higher education: Three different design approaches. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 440–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Essex: Pearson.Google Scholar
  3. Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers and Education, 78, 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barkley, E. (2010). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2009). Remixing chemistry class: Two Colorado teachers make vodcasts of their lectures to free up class time for hands-on activities. Learning and Leading with Technology, 36(4), 22–27.Google Scholar
  6. Bernard, J. S. (2015). The flipped classroom: Fertile ground for nursing education research. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 12(1), 99–109.Google Scholar
  7. Biggs, J., & Moore, P. (1993). Process of learning (3rd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Borgerding, L. A., Sadler, T. D., & Koroly, M. J. (2013). Teachers’ concerns about biotechnology education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Çakıroğlu, Ü., & Öztürk, M. (2017). Flipped classroom with problem based activities: Exploring self-regulated learning in a programming language course. Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 337–349.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, & Chen, N. S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers and Education, 79, 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheung, D. (2005). Science teachers’ concerns about school-based curriculum development. Hong Kong Science Teachers’ Journal, 22(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
  12. Cheung, D., & Yip, D. Y. (2004). How science teachers’ concerns about school-based assessment of practical work vary with time: The Hong Kong experience. Research in Science and Technological Education, 22(2), 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chuang, H. H., Weng, C. Y., & Chen, C. H. (2018). Which students benefit most from a flipped classroom approach to language learning? British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  15. De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2005). Does e-learning policy drive change in higher education? A case study relating models of organisational change to e-learning implementation. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(1), 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dong, A. M. (2016). A literature review on flipped classroom from 2010 to 2015. In Paper presented at the 24th Chinese America educational research and development association annual conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Flipped Learning Network. (2013). What is flipped learning? Retrieved September 1, 2018, from
  19. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & Adam, E. (2016). The taking action guide to building coherence in schools, districts, and systems. New York: SAGE.Google Scholar
  21. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gee, J. P. (2013). Creating smarter students through digital learning. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  23. Gough, E., DeJong, D., Grundmeyer, T., & Baron, M. (2017). K-12 teacher perceptions regarding the flipped classroom model for teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 45(3), 390–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. New York: NY State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. New Jersey: Pearson.Google Scholar
  26. Hau, K. T. (2015). Flipped classroom. Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research Newsletters, 36, 1–2.Google Scholar
  27. Hockings, C., Cooke, S., Yamashita, H., McGinty, S., & Bowl, M. (2008). Switched off? A study of disengagement among computing students at two universities. Research Papers in Education, 23(2), 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hung, H. (2014). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hwang, G. J. (Ed.). (2016). Flipped classroom: Theories, strategies and applications. Taipei: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jansen, B. A. (2011). Inquiry unpacked: An introduction to inquiry-based learning. Library Media Connection, 29(5), 10–12.Google Scholar
  32. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 higher (education ed.). Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  33. Jong, M. S. Y. (2014). Elementary students’ view of collaborative knowledge building in LearningVillages. Interaction Design and Architecture(s), 21, 37–56.Google Scholar
  34. Jong, M. S. Y. (2016). Teachers’ concerns about adopting constructivist online game-based learning in formal curriculum teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(4), 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jong, M. S. Y. (2017). Empowering students in the process of social inquiry learning through flipping the classroom. Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 306–322.Google Scholar
  36. Jong, M. S. Y. (2018). A pilot study on social science faculty members’ adoption of flipped learning. Paper presented at the IEEE Education Society Technical Committee on Learning Sciences Annual Meeting 2018, Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar
  37. Jong, M. S. Y., Chan, T., Hue, M. T., & Tam, V. (2018). Gamifying and mobilising social enquiry-based learning in authentic outdoor environments. Educational Technology & Society, 21(4), 277–292.Google Scholar
  38. Jong, M. S. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). Understanding the concerns of teachers about leveraging mobile technology to facilitate outdoor social inquiry learning: The EduVenture experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 328–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kurt, G. (2017). Implementing the flipped classroom in teacher education: Evidence from Turkey. Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 211–221.Google Scholar
  40. Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lin, J. L., Liang, J. C., Su, Y. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Exploring the relationships between self-efficacy and preference for teacher authority among computer science majors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(2), 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lo, C. K., Lie, C. W., & Hew, K. F. (2018). Applying “First Principles of Instruction” as a design theory of the flipped classroom: Findings from a collective study of four secondary school subjects. Computers and Education, 118, 150–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marcu, A. D. (2013). Relationship of self-efficacy to stages of concern in the adoption of innovation in higher education. Retrieved from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Accession No. 13625).Google Scholar
  44. Martin, S., Farnan, J., & Arora, V. (2013). FUTURE: New strategies for hospitalists to overcome challenges in teaching and today’s wards. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 8(7), 409–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mason, G., Shuman, T., & Cook, K. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matar, N. (2015). Evaluating e-learning system use by “CBAM—stages of concern” methodology in Jordanian Universities. World of Computer Science and Information Technology Journal, 5(5), 78–81.Google Scholar
  47. Maxwell, J. A. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  48. O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prensky, M. (2016). Education to better their world: Unleashing the power of 21st-century kids. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  50. Prober, C., & Khan, S. (2013). Medical education reimagined: A call to action. Academic Medicine, 88, 1407–1410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Randall, J. H. (2016). Stages of faculty concern about teaching online: Relationships between faculty teaching methods and technology use in teaching. Retrieved from ERIC. (ERIC No. ED571076).Google Scholar
  52. Sahin, A., Cavlazoglu, B., & Zeytuncu, Y. E. (2015). Flipping a college calculus course: A case study. Educational Technology and Society, 18(3), 142–152.Google Scholar
  53. Seery, M. K. (2015). Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: Emerging trends and potential directions. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 16(4), 758–768.Google Scholar
  54. Small, R. V., Arone, M. P., Stripling, B., & Berger, P. (2012). Teaching for inquiry: Engaging the learner within. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.Google Scholar
  55. Song, Y., & Kapur, M. (2017). How to flip the classroom—“Productive failure” or “traditional flipped classroom” pedagogical design? Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 292–305.Google Scholar
  56. Sun, J. C. Y., Wu, Y. T., & Lee, W. I. (2017). The effect of the flipped classroom approach to OpenCourseWare instruction on students’ self-regulation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 713–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wallace, V. L., & Husid, W. N. (2011). Collaborating for inquiry-based learning (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  58. Yeung, K., & O’Malley, P. (2014). Making “The Flip” work: Barriers to and implementation strategies for introducing flipped teaching methods into traditional higher education courses. New Directions for Institutional Research, 10(1), 59–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ziegenfuss, D. H. (2016). Closing the loop: Building synergy for learning through a professional development MOOC about flipped teaching. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning, 3(1), 103–124.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and Instruction & Centre for Learning Sciences and TechnologiesThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations