- students from a large midwestern university in a general chemistry class were divided into discussion/lab sections 
- tested groups in the fall and spring semesters 
- fall semester-12 sections assigned to traditional discussion condition and 4 assigned to collaborative discussion condition 
- spring semester-4 sections assigned to the flipped classroom condition 
- traditional condition- 3 lectures a week + textbook + discussion section (had opportunities to collaborate but no collaboration support)
- collaborative condition- same lectures + discussion sections with collaboration support (had a worksheet with an individual phase designed to build on prior knowledge and a collaborative phase)-TA's encouraged group discussion, to use additional resources, and did not answer questions specifically
- flipped collaborative condition-only 2 lectures per week (students had to study specific sections of the textbook before discussion-did minilectures based off of areas of most needed support-had guest lectures from the chemistry department-TA gave 15-20 min presentation of information needed to prepare students for lab sessions) + 2 weekly (50 min) discussion sections (first identical to collaborative condition and second devoted to mastery activities)
- Used a pretest and assessed progress through exam scores, course total scores and student attitudes with a survey (using a likert scale)
        

Unpacking "Active Learning" experimental study design

- Discredit the original hypothesis that collaborative condition did not significantly outperform the traditional condition 
- supported hypothesis that flipped collaborative condition outperformed the traditional condition and the collaborative condition 
- results due to self-study because they had to engage in the material beforehand
- flipped classroom condition- “active learning had positive effects on students’ ratings of the textbook”
- found negative effects on students' perceptions of their own learning gains-supports other research that active learning results in more negative experiences (because students have to put in more effort so it is perceived as harder and they are more aware of their knowledge gap)

Unpacking "Active Learning"  study results 

- does adding flipped classroom methods increase effectivity as opposed to in-class collaboration support alone?
- hypothesis- the more active learning that one does before/during class, the better the learning outcome 

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Michigan State University

•	Effects on learning

•	Student perspectives

•	Problem solving

•	Student collaboration


Focuses of research on flipped classrooms

Rau, M. A., Kennedy, K., Oxtoby, L., Bollom, M., &amp; Moore, J. W. (2017). Unpacking “Active Learning”: A Combination of Flipped Classroom and Collaboration Support Is More Effective but Collaboration Support Alone Is Not. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(10), 1406-1414. doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00240

Unpacking “Active Learning”: A Combination of Flipped Classroom and Collaboration Support Is More Effective but Collaboration Support Alone Is Not

This paper examined different factors that contribute to the efficacy of flipped classrooms for students, focusing primarily on the degree to which students interacted with material outside of the classroom and their motivation for doing so. The researchers analyzed several different aspects of pre-recorded lectures, such as the length of the videos and their timing over the course of the semester. They also examined individual difference predictors among the students, primarily focusing on their attitudes towards flipped classroom learning and their goal orientations (GO), such as mastery GO (focusing on improving abilities) and performance GO (striving to demonstrate competence). The researchers used a series of surveys over the course of the semester to track student behavior and reactions to the material, and analyzed the data to look for interactions between the students’ behaviors and the individual difference predictors. The researchers found that the length of the video was negatively correlated with the amount of time students spent watching them, but that the effect of time during the semester was not significantly correlated with student behavior. The researchers also found that the different Goal Orientations did significantly impact behaviors: Mastery GO was positively related to watch time while Performance-Avoidance GO was negatively correlated to the amount of time students spent watching the lectures. They also found that individuals with Performance-Avoidance GO tended to watch less of the lectures as the semester progressed. In light of these findings, the researchers concluded that flipped classrooms would likely benefit from future research into individual differences of the students, such as conscientiousness, and efforts of professors to increase their students’ Mastery GO through communicating the value of the material or motivating/incentivizing students to watch the lectures. 

Individual Difference and Contextual Predictors of Flipped Classroom Behaviors and Reactions: A Longitudinal Investigation

collaboration support
- supports active learning during class time
- important because if students do not receive specific instructions on how to collaborate, they will not do it
- implementation-instructors can structure collaborative activities, students can build on their prior knowledge, and instructors can enhance the quality of the students' collaboration 

flipped classrooms 
- supports active learning before class 
- requires self-study 
- in some instances, replaces the whole lecture and in others, replaces a portion of the lecture 


Collaboration support vs. Flipped classrooms

Unpacking "Active Learning" hypotheses/research questions

A study that uses quantitative and qualitative data to examine engineer students’ perspectives on a flipped classroom approach and investigate how students collaboratively solved problems during class time.

Student Perspectives on the Flipped-Classroom Approach and Collaborative Problem-Solving Process: Summary

In typical computer programming courses, instructors use class time to teach grammar and provide training. Despite this, students are often unable to create programs other than samples provided in class. This indicates class time is not being used effectively and more time is needed to create code while in class. In effort to resolve this problem, a flipped classroom approach was applied to a computer programming course.  

Collaborative Learning in Computer Programming Courses That Adopted the Flipped Classroom Summary

This research study sought to look at how the flipped classroom model of education could affect students' performance in classes as well as how well it affected their self-determination (autonomy, competence, relatedness). The study involved comparing a flipped classroom approach compared to the typical in-person class, to see if focusing on collaborative, interactive activities in class with help from the teacher might be better for learning. Through three classes (ICT, Algebra, and Humanities), each with their own experimental (flipped) and control (in-person) conditions, the study tried to answer three questions:
- did flipped classrooms improve learning outcomes?
- did it help with student satisfaction?
- what effects were there on self-determination for students? 

Investigating the Impact of Flipped Classroom on Students' Learning Experience: A Self-Determination Theory Approach

This study utilized two groups to determine the impact of the flipped classroom model. Both groups used collaborative learning in a course that was a part of a childhood teacher degree program. At the end of the study, collaborative learning appeared to be most useful in the flipped classroom group. 

Learn Before

Related

Learn After