Running head: THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

Using the Flipped Classroom Model to Support Constructivist Science Education

Caroline Cooney
Boise State University

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

Abstract
A trend in secondary education is the flipped classroom model. The flipped model flips the
typical classroom paradigm which is to lecture in class and practice for homework. In the
flipped model, students listen to lectures and watch videos at home, and spend class time
developing the ideas from the lecture, solving problems, and working in the lab, either
individually or collaboratively, all with instructor guidance. Constructivist learning theory
suggests that student create their own knowledge through interactions with peers, teachers, and
content. When constructivist learning theory is applied to the classroom, students work
individually or with peers, with teacher guidance, to construct meaning by combining new
knowledge with prior knowledge, often using authentic or real world problems in a studentcentered environment. Science demands that students explore questions and develop answers
based on experiments, data, and problems. Science as a discipline can be said to be
constructivist in nature, as scientists build their knowledge by examining ideas, questions, and

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

problems, and find answers to new questions that build upon prior knowledge, and on work of
peers. Teaching science through a constructivist lens helps students to learn both scientific
content and the methods of science. This paper discusses how the flipped model of education
can be used to create a constructivist learning environment where students engage in 21st
century learning skills such as collaboration, communication, and problem solving.
Keywords: 21st Century learning skills, Constructivist learning theory, Flipped classroom

Using the flipped classroom model to support constructivist science education

Numerous studies have been conducted on flipped models of learning, and the results
have demonstrated that the model has potential to help students actively engage in learning
(Covill, Patel, and Gill, 2013; Herreid and Schiller, 2013; Love, Hodge, Grandgenett, and
Swift, 2014; Moore, Gillett, and Steele 2014). The flipped model by itself does not change the
way students engage with content and each other, but rather, it is how the model is applied
both inside and outside of the classroom that has the capability to engage students in
constructivist, 21st century learning, such as collaboration, communication, and problem
solving. Using the flipped model in a constructivist environment not only helps students to
actively engage in their learning, but also encourages constructivist learning germane to

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

scientific inquiry, a process where knowledge is built by asking questions, exploring results of
experiments, and finding answers that build upon prior knowledge and on work of peers.
Constructivist Learning Theory
Constructivist learning theory suggests that knowledge is subjective, it is individually
and socially constructed through discovery, interactions, and negotiations with others, events,
and objects (Larson & Lockee, 2014 p.77). In other words, students create meaning from
experiences with peers, content, and teachers, building on prior knowledge to construct
individual meaning. According to Ertmer and Newby (2013), constructivists contend that
what we know of the world, stems from our own interpretations or our experiences. Humans
create meaning, rather as opposed to acquiring it (p. 55). Constructivist learning is grounded
in situations where the learner interacts with content, changing and building knowledge with
each interaction. Because the interactions with prior knowledge, peers, and content build new
knowledge, the activities that develop as a result of the interactions tend to be based on
problems and questions that arise during the process. As a result, constructivist activities tend
to revolve around authentic question and problems.
In a constructivist classroom, the teacher acts as a facilitator guiding and helping
students engage in activities to construct meaning. In a constructivist science classroom,
students engage with content by asking questions, developing testable questions, and
performing lab activities, all with teacher guidance. As teachers implement a constructivist
pedagogical approach in the classroom, the role of the teacher changes from transmitter of
knowledge to facilitator of knowledge construction. A facilitator creates opportunities for
others to explore ideas...encourages and questions others to find solutions to worthwhile
problems (Hand & Vance, 1995, Teachers role facilitator section). It takes time to implement
and reflect on the changes in the classroom, and to practice new skills for both teacher and
student. (Hand & Vance, 1995).

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

Seimars, Graves, Schroyer, and Staver (2012) contend that constructivist learning
theory can be effectively applied to teach science, but voice concerns how the policies of No
Child Left Behind (NCLB) discourage constructivist strategies in the science classroom.
NCLB endangers science learning as mandatory state tests discourage constructivism in favor
of a transmission model of teaching where teachers give information for students to memorize.
(Seimars, et al., 2012, p.266). While the Common Core Standards (CCS) and the Next
Generation Science Standards (NGSS), both with an emphasis on (a) investigating
phenomena, (b) collecting and analyzing data, (c) making claims from the findings, and (d)
supporting claims and explanations (Llewellyn, 2013, p. 35), are the new standards for
science education, however the mandatory state tests remain. For a teacher navigating
mandatory testing, as well as CCS and NGSS, the role of the teacher is to create a classroom
where students work together to learn and build knowledge and are prepared for the tests. In a
constructivist classroom, the teacher creates an environment where the student can explore
content, and ultimately develop ways to segment content and concepts, allowing students to
answer their own questions, and share their new knowledge with the group (Seimars, et al.,
2012, p. 270). The role of a teacher in a constructivist classroom is to organize the information
and concepts using a variety strategies while helping students answer their own questions and
devise experiments to test their questions.
Pedagogical Approach in Constructivist Classroom
Some of the pedagogical tools to cultivate a constructivist environment in the science
classroom include project based learning (PBL) (Moylan and Alexander, 2008), the use of
technology- based curriculum, (Huffman, Goldberg, & Michlin, 2003), inquiry based activities
(Alozie, Grueber, & Dereski, 2012), and reading strategies such as Vocabulary, Concept,
Example and Explain (VCEE) (DAlessandro, Sorensen, Homoelle, & Hodum, 2014). PBL

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

fosters teamwork, personal responsibility, and problem solving, which are outcomes associated
with constructivist learning and 21st century learning. Just as the constructivist method
suggests, the teacher in a PBL classroom is a facilitator to learning (Moylan & Alexander,
2008, p. 287-288). Research by Huffman, et al. (2003) supports the use of technology-based
curriculum, such as computer interfaces to model motion, to help students understand and
visualize concepts. In the study by Huffman, et al. (2003), the classrooms that used
technology-based curriculum scored higher on the unit pre and post tests, and participated in
more inquiry-based, hands-on activities than the classes that did not use technology-based
curriculum. Technology use in the science classroom can lead to a constructivist environment
because students engage in more hands-on, inquiry-based activities. Using the hands-on
activities helps students to build their own knowledge, and improve their learning outcomes as
measured by their test scores.
Creating hands-on, engaging activities can be difficult for teachers who may have
limited planning time. Alozie, et al. (2012) suggests several easy methods for turning
prescribed labs, which are labs where students follow a set of instructions without thinking
about the process into inquiry based, constructivist learning opportunities. A simple method
includes using the 5E method (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, evaluate) to develop
problem solving skills and opportunities to interact effectively with peers and teachers. By
engaging students and exploring their prior knowledge, teachers begin the process of allowing
students to direct the inquiry that occurs in class. Another simple way to begin the
transformation from prescribed lab to inquiry activity is to mix up the procedure in such a
lab. Students, based on their prior knowledge, and research with each other, determine and
explain to each other the correct order for the procedure. Students continue to build their
knowledge as they complete the lab, share results with each other, and discuss their results

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

with each other and their teacher. The reading strategy, VCEE, encourages students to take an
active role in reading science, and think like a scientist. The VCEE method encourages
students to use science inclusively, interacting with the text instead of regarding the text as
separate from what scientists do. (DAlessandro et al. 2014, p. 46). When used regularly,
students that employ VCEE are better prepared to think and speak like scientists, allowing for
increased depth and breadth of content covered in class. (DAlessandro et al. 2014). Activities
that encourage inquiry and collaboration are constructivist by nature, and take time to develop
and implement in the classroom.
The Flipped Model
The flipped classroom model flips the traditional classroom paradigm. Instead of
listening to lectures during classes, and practicing problems or finishing lab questions for
homework, students watch and listen to short video lectures at home, while spending class
time doing what would have been homework, such as problems and questions. Students may
spend class time engaged in a variety of activities including: developing testable questions for
lab activities, solving problems, and discussing problem solving strategies. Acting as a
facilitator, the teacher helps students navigate their activities as they explore course content by
developing testable questions and ultimately finding answers to their questions. The key to a
successful flip is to use class time engaging in constructivist activities.
Film and video have been used in classrooms for almost a century. Many, including
Thomas Edison thought that film would make books obsolete (as cited in Cuban, 1986, p.
11). While books are not obsolete, the use of video in schools has evolved, and one such
evolution is the flipped classroom. Research by Hill and Nelson (2011) showed that students in
a college ecology class thought the use of video podcasts (vodcasts) as a supplement to
classroom lecture helped them to learn difficult content. Students also enjoyed the flexibility

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

of watching and re-watching the vodcasts at their own pace. While the students in the study
did not think that the vodcasts could or should replace lecture, the classroom paradigm
remained unchanged, and students did not have the opportunity to engage in hands-on learning
activities in class (Hill & Nelson, 2011). The question that arises is: Can the vodcast replace
in-class lecture, and if the in-class lecture is replaced by a vodcast, what replaces the time
originally dedicated for lecture? The flipped model bridges the gap between video lectures
and classroom activities, by replacing in class lecture with at home video viewing.
There are two equally important parts to the flip: the at-home and the in-class
component. Outside of class, students engage with new content at their own pace using short
video lectures. Teachers use class time for constructivist activities to drive student instruction.
The flipped model frees valuable class time to engage in more hands-on constructivist
activities such as PBL, computer based curriculum, and inquiry labs.
Benefits and Drawbacks of the Flipped Model
Love, et al. (2014) compared the flipped classroom model with a traditional classroom
model in two college linear algebra classes. The traditional class utilized in-class lecture and
problems for homework, while the flipped model utilized at-home video lectures, and class
time was spent working with peers solving and explaining problems. The results showed that
students in the flipped class increased their scores on the three content exams as compared to
their peers in the traditional class. Compared to the traditional class, not only did the students
in the flipped model see larger gains on test scores, but also, the students in the flipped class
were more likely to have positive perceptions of the class as a whole. Student in the flipped
model felt that the pedagogy used in and out of class led to a deeper understanding.
Additionally, the students in the flipped classroom felt more comfortable interacting with each
other and their instructor. (p. 322). The Love, et al. (2014) study supports using the flipped
model to boost academic gains and increase peer interactions and collaboration.

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

Moore, et al. (2014) implemented the flipped model in middle school math classrooms,
and their study showed that students in the flipped model were more engaged than students in
a traditional model. Students in the flipped classroom had a higher homework completion rate,
and more class time was spent engaging with students on meaningful problem solving as
compared to the traditional model. The most salient point was that class time was spent
collaborating and working with peers and teachers. It is the classroom interaction permitted by
the flipped design, which helps students make connections and construct knowledge. A student
in the Moore, et al. (2014) study noted that he did not like the flipped model because he had to
think a lot harder (p. 423), which is precisely the point of developing the flipped model to
engage students in constructivist activities.
Covill, et al. (2013) explored several case studies involving flipped classrooms in first
year university classes and secondary A level (equivalent to U.S. Advanced Placement AP
classes) Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) classes in the U.K., noting that
the preparation with video lectures before class lends valuable class time for students to
explore real world STEM problems. In another flipped model study in the U.K., Kettle (2013)
compared two units in a high school physics classroom. The work unit was flipped, while the
related unit, power was taught in the traditional method. The study by Kettle (2013) found
that the high performing students did well in terms of test scores and taking ownership of their
work using the flipped model. However, struggling students did not see the same gains in
terms of work independence and test scores. The careful planning of classroom activities to
include constructivist tools can help to engage all students with the content and each other.
In another study, Herreid and Schiller (2013), describe the benefits and drawbacks of
the flipped model of teaching. Ruddicks (2012) study (as cited by Herried & Schiller, 2013, p.
63) points to the success of a flipped model where students in a flipped high school chemistry

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

10

course outperformed their peers in a traditional chemistry classroom in terms of final exam
scores. Additionally, the flipped model gives students the opportunity to work at their own
pace, while allowing instructors the time to engage in more formative assessments. Formative
assessments can be informal conversations with students as they work or more formal paper
and pencil assessments. Since the flipped model allows for more time to include constructivist
activities, it allows for inclusion of 21st century learning skills, such as collaboration, critical
thinking, and problem solving (Herreid & Schiller, 2013, p. 62).
Drawbacks of the flipped model include: students resistance to doing the work at
home, and finding or creating quality videos. A relatively simple way to encourage video
viewing is to add a short quiz or graded assignment to the videos to ensure that students come
to class prepared to engage in the active learning component. In terms of creating or finding
quality videos, there are many quality pre-made videos (see Appendix A).
Implementing the Flipped Model in a Constructivist Science Classroom
Flipping a classroom, in and of itself, does not result in a constructivist classroom. To
create a constructivist classroom using the flipped model requires utilizing the class time that
is gained by implementing the flip on inquiry learning which is closely tied to the practice and
application of constructivist strategies. Herreid and Schiller (2013) compare flipping to other
educational trends such as inquiry learning, process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL),
and just in time teaching (JITT) and suggest that what these prior trends and flipping have in
common is the active learning component. Additional active learning strategies include PBL,
technology based curriculum, and inquiry labs. Active learning works best. Telling doesnt
work very well. Doing is the secret (Herreid & Schiller 2013, p. 65).
Another constructivist tool of the flipped model is having students interact outside of
class, on a discussion board to continue the learning from class. Covill, et al. (2013) advocate
using the flipped model combined with post-class online interactions between students. Using

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

11

post-class discussions are constructivist by nature because the students are collaborating with
peers and teacher, using real world problems, and building their knowledge in the process. Hsi
(2007) explores how students use digital technology such as social media and on-line games to
learn with their peers outside of school. Students use technology outside of school to
communicate with each other and learn about topics of interest, in essence using technology
and interacting with their peers to construct meaning. Teachers can plan lessons to continue
building on students current digital activities. The implications for the flipped classroom and
constructivism are that teachers can harness what students are already doing with technology,
and engage them with digital materials, creating opportunities for peers to interact to build
their content-area knowledge. Additionally, as suggested by Covill, Patel & Gill (2013),
students can collaborate outside of class as an extension to continue asking and answering each
others question. By extending the conversation outside of class, students continue to construct
meaning. According to Moylan and Alexander (2008), this collaboration can occur with
classmates or on a larger scale with peers from around the world engaged in similar projects.
For teachers, wanting to try the flipped model, Moore, et al. (2014) suggest starting
with one unit of study, finding good pre-made videos (see appendix A for some physics
websites) or creating their own. According to Herreid & Schiller (2013), Kettle (2013), Moore
(2014), it is important to find methods to encourage students to interact with the videos. Some
suggestions include video viewing worksheets, open note quizzes on the videos, or any way to
ensure that the students watch the video, as it is important to have the background knowledge
as they begin their constructivist exploration of the topics in class.
During class, it is important to engage in constructivist activities. The PBL model is
one example of a constructivist activity. PBL model works in a flipped class because the

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

12

projects and problems are the engaging, hands-on activities done in class, and the at-home,
flipped videos and readings are the background knowledge relating to the projects.
Past studies show that making the flipped classroom model work not only requires a
reversal of activities in terms of lecture and homework, but also requires creating engaging inclass opportunities for students to explore questions to build knowledge (Covill, et al 2013;
Herreid & Schiller 2013). By flipping the classroom, the students and teacher have more time
to work together in class to develop and test ideas
Conclusion
The flipped classroom model has great potential for...improving knowledge and
providing time to engage in high cognitive demand tasks (Moore, et al., 2014, p 425). High
cognitive skills such as collaboration and problem solving take time for students to develop.
Likewise, switching roles and becoming a facilitator and implementing constructivist activities
requires time and practice by the teacher. One way to maximize time spent developing
constructivist skills is to minimize the non-constructivist activities, the activities where
students are the knowledge receptacles rather than the knowledge builders. The flipped
classroom model allows for creating that extra time. Students engage with the material prior to
coming to class and spend class time working on their questions as they relate to the content,
maximizing their time working on constructivist activities. Further research should test
specific constructivist activities and strategies (PBL, JITT, computer based curriculum, etc.) to
determine which constructivist activities work best in conjunction with the flipped classroom.
It is clear from the research that the flipped model offers students and teachers the opportunity
to increase the amount of time spent in class engaging in constructivist learning environments.

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

13

References
Alozie, N. M., Grueber, D. J., & Dereski, M. O. (2012). Promoting 21st-century skills in the
science classroom by adapting cookbook lab activities: The case of DNA extraction of
wheat germ. American Biology Teacher, 74(7), 485-489. doi:10.1525/abt.2012.77.7.10
Covill, D., Patel, B., & Gill, D. (2013). Flipping the classroom to support learning: An
overview of flipped classes from science, engineering and product design. School
Science Review, 95(350), 73-80.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
DAlessandro.L., Sorensen, T., Homoelle, B., & Hodum, T. (2014). Vocabulary, concept,
evidence, & examples. Science Teacher, 81(4), 45-51.
Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing
critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement
Quarterly. 26(2), 43-71. doi:10.1002/piq.21143
Hand, B., & Vance, K. (1995). Implementation of constructivist approaches within the science
classroom. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41(4), 37.
Herreid, C.F. & Schiller,N.A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of
College Science Teaching, 42(5). 62-65.
Hill, J. L., & Nelson, A. (2011). New technology, new pedagogy? Employing video podcasts
in learning and teaching about exotic ecosystems. Environmental Education Research,
17(3), 393-408. doi:10.1080/13504622.2010.545873
Hsi, S. (2007). Conceptualizing learning from the everyday activities of digital kids.
International Journal of Science Education, 29(12), 1509-1529.
doi:10.1080/09500690701494076
Huffman, D., Goldberg, F. & Michlin, M. (2003). Using computers to create constructivist
learning environments: Impact on pedagogy and achievement. Journal of Computers in
Mathematics and Science Teaching. 22(2), 1581-168.

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

14

Kettle, M. (2013). Flipped physics. Physics Education, 48(5), 593-596, doi 10.1088/00319120/48/5I/593
Land, S.M., Hannafin, M. J., & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centered learning environments:
Foundations, assumptions and design. In Jonassen, D. & Land, S. (Eds.), Theoretical
Foundations of Learning Environments (pp 3-25). New York, NY: Routledge.
Larson, L.C., & Miller, T. (2011). 21st century skills: Prepare students for the future. Kappa
Delta PI Record, 47(3), 121-123. doi: 10.1080/00228958.2011.10516575
Larson, M., & Lockee, B. (2014). Streamlined ID, a practical guide to instructional design.
New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
Llewellyn, D. (2013). Making and defending scientific arguments. Science Teacher, 80(5), 3438.
Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. W. (2014). Student learning and perceptions
in a flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in
Science & Technology, 45(3), 317-324. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2013.822582
Moore, A.J., Gillett, M.R. & Steele, M.D. (2014). Fostering student engagement with the flip.
Mathematics Teacher, 107(6), 420-425. doi: 10.5951/mathteacher.107.6.0420
Moylan, W. (2008). Learning by project: Developing essential 21st century skills using student
team projects. International Journal of Learning, 15(9), 287-292.
Seimears, C., Graves, E., Schroyer, M., & Staver, J. (2012). How constructivist-based teaching
influences students learning science. Educational Forum, 76(2), 265-271.
doi:10.1080/00131725.2011.653092
Strayer, J. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation
and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-193.
doi:10.1007/s10984-012-9108-4

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

15

THE FLIPPED MODEL IN A CONSTRUCTIVIST CLASSROOM

Appendix A
Resources for Physics Videos
Aplus Physics http://aplusphysics.com/videos.html
Brightstorm http://www.brightstorm.com/why-brightstorm/the-best-video-library
Flipping Physics http://www.flippingphysics.com/
Kahn Academy https://www.khanacademy.org/

16