J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
DOI 10.1007/s10956-016-9605-9
Performance and Perception in the Flipped Learning Model:
An Initial Approach to Evaluate the Effectiveness of a New
Teaching Methodology in a General Science Classroom
David González-Gómez1 • Jin Su Jeong2 • Diego Airado Rodrı́guez1
Florentina Cañada-Cañada3
Published online: 2 February 2016
Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016
Abstract ‘‘Flipped classroom’’ teaching methodology is
a type of blended learning in which the traditional class
setting is inverted. Lecture is shifted outside of class, while
the classroom time is employed to solve problems or doing
practical works through the discussion/peer collaboration
of students and instructors. This relatively new instruc-
tional methodology claims that flipping your classroom
engages more effectively students with the learning pro-
cess, achieving better teaching results. Thus, this research
aimed to evaluate the effects of the flipped classroom on
the students’ performance and perception of this new
methodology. This study was conducted in a general sci-
ence course, sophomore of the Primary Education bachelor
degree in the Training Teaching School of the University
of Extremadura (Spain) during the course 2014/2015. In
order to assess the suitability of the proposed methodology,
the class was divided in two groups. For the first group, a
& David González-Gómez
dggomez@unex.es
Jin Su Jeong
jin@unex.es
Diego Airado Rodrı́guez
airado@unex.es
Florentina Cañada-Cañada
flori@unex.es
1
Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Training
Teaching School, University of Extremadura, Avd. de la
Universidad s/n, Cáceres, Spain
2 when delivered to individual’’ (Sams and Bergmann 2013;
Department of Graphic Expression, University of
Extremadura, Calle Santa Teresa de Jornet 38, Mérida, Spain
3 found not only in the constructivist but also in the social
Department of Science and Mathematics Education,
Education School, University of Extremadura, Badajoz,
Spain
123
•
traditional methodology was followed, and it was used as
control. On the other hand, the ‘‘flipped classroom’’
methodology was used in the second group, where the
students were given diverse materials, such as video les-
sons and reading materials, before the class to be revised at
home by them. Online questionnaires were as well pro-
vided to assess the progress of the students before the class.
Finally, the results were compared in terms of students’
achievements and a post-task survey was also conducted to
know the students’ perceptions. A statistically significant
difference was found on all assessments with the flipped
class students performing higher on average. In addition,
most students had a favorable perception about the flipped
classroom noting the ability to pause, rewind and review
lectures, as well as increased individualized learning and
increased teacher availability.
Keywords Inverted methodology
General science
teaching
Pre-service teacher students
Teaching
methodology
Introduction
The high school chemistry teachers Jonathan Bergmann
and Aaron Sams (Tucker 2012) introduced inverse
instruction methodology (IIM) or ‘‘flipped classroom’’ in
2007. This instruction methodology is based on the premise
that ‘‘directs instruction and lecture is not an effective
teaching tool in the group learning space, but is effective
Bergmann and Sams 2014). The IIM foundation must be
learning theory (Hill et al. 2009) since the learning process,
from the student point of view, is achieved as an active and
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
social process. Besides, this methodology allows students
to learn at their own and therefore having more flexibility
to distribute their studying time, but also putting on them
more responsibility in the learning process (O’Flaherty and
Phillips 2015).
Thus, in the IIM setting, a switched setting is proposed
where the contents are delivered to home, and the home-
work takes place in the classroom, being the number of in-
class hours the same as in the traditional approach. In the
flipped classroom model, students are asked to view pre-
recorded lecture videos prior to attending class, and
therefore, in this methodology the lectures delivered in
classroom are just-in-time lectures, normally used to
address specific questions (Tourón and Santiago 2015). In
addition, the class time is used, as well, to engage in stu-
dent-centered learning activities like inquiry and problem
solving, fostering the students to be more interactive during
class time (Moraros et al. 2015). Regarding science uni-
versity teaching, Beichner and Saul (2003) reported that
students learn considerably more from active inquiry-based
activities and problem solving than from listening to lec-
tures. Another important feature of the inverse methodol-
ogy is that the video and interactive lessons are always
available to students, and therefore, they could reinforce
their learning by re-watching the materials provided by the
professor the number of times they need. Also, when fol-
lowing a traditional methodology, students are more
focused on taking notes than understanding the professor’s
explanations. Different publications have already high-
lighted that learners gain meaningful understanding of
concepts through active engagement, not by passive lis-
tening to verbal presentation (Handelsman et al. 2004;
Knight and Wood 2005). Due to the increased availability
of online instructional videos through different platforms,
educators are transitioning their instructional strategies to
incorporate flipped classroom methodologies. As it is
mentioned by Mattis (2014), the implementation of the IIM
means to combine both traditional and online education by
using in- and out-of-class time, achieving more efficient
learning opportunities (Young 2002).
The general move in education toward student-centered
instructional design makes important to assess the students’
performance on these pedagogical methodology, and it is a
must to settle this assessment on solid statistical basis. In
the case of the IIM, the evaluation for university studies is
still underreported (Bishop and Verleger 2013; Love et al.
2013), especially in Science, Technology, Engineering and
Math (STEM) and numerous introductory courses (Sowa
and Thorsen 2015). However, the data available in the
literature appoint that the IIM could provide more success
from the academic point of view in comparison with a
traditional classroom setting (Sowa and Thorsen 2015).
Particularly, Love et al. (2013) point out that the students
451
performance was significantly increased in introductory
STEM courses by following the IIM, achieving better
outcomes and showed increased enjoyment. Besides, final
examination results were comparable to those obtained by
students who followed a traditional classroom setting
(TCS), representing conceptual understanding. Similar
performance findings were reported for a senior class of an
engineering course (Mason et al. 2013). In addition, this
research also indicates that more material was covered
when an IIM was followed. Analogous results are descri-
bed in a mathematics course (Mattis 2014) where the
control group decreased its scores, while the experimental
increased its scores. This report also suggests that the
experimental group demonstrated higher accuracy, espe-
cially on items of moderate complexity. On the other hand,
in Blair’s report (Blair et al. 2015), no significant differ-
ences, in terms of students’ perception, were found when
comparing the IIM with a TCS.
With regard to the students’ perception, different studies
agreed that students have a positive perception toward the
flipped classroom methodology. Precisely, in a 2015 report
undertaken with 142 students from two different courses, it
shows that the students preferred the IIM compared with
the traditional pedagogical methodologies (Gilboy et al.
2015). The preference of students in a STEM courses
(Sowa and Thorsen 2015) indicates not only their prefer-
ence for the IIM methodology when comparing with a
traditional setting, but also a majority of students stated
that the teaching instruments used in the flipped classroom
setting were useful as a learning tool. In a previous study
(Roach 2014), students were asked to point out the benefits
of the IIM, highlighting that the ability to watch or re-
watch the flipped materials allowed them to overcome
difficulties in the traditional learning process. The
instructor perception concerning the IIM has been also
reviewed, suggesting that additional time and technological
support is required (O’Flaherty and Phillips 2015). Also,
the IIM implies an increase in the number and frequency of
assessments, and that is also a concern for instructors.
However, a rewarding active learning is acknowledged
(Ferreri and O’Connor 2013).
The main objective of this research was to assess the
suitability of using the IIM in terms of students’ perception
and performance, comparing the results with a TCS. The
study was conducted in a general science course, sopho-
more of the Primary Education bachelor degree in the
Training Teaching School of the University of Extrema-
dura (Spain) during the course 2014/2015. A total of 103
students participated in the study. The syllabus of this
subject includes general topics about science, mostly
related to the matter and the energy. The subject is com-
pulsory for all students and is taught in the second semester
of the course in a 4-h/week setting. According to the data
123
452
provided by the university for the period 2009–2014, the
average passing rate in the Primary Education bachelor
degree was 86 %. On the other hand, in the case of the
general science course, the passing rate was considerably
lower than the whole program average. Precisely, the
average passing rate in the same period was 72.7 %.
Therefore, students seem to have more difficulties in
passing this subject compared with the others conforming
the bachelor program. In fact, data show that students took
normally 2.5 years on average to complete this course
successfully. Even more, in some cases students took
4 years. One of the reasons of this low pass rate must be
found in the fact that many of the students do not have a
science educational background, being the last science
course taken in early years of middle school. Therefore,
most of the basic concepts needed to understand the subject
syllabus are already forgotten or never learnt by a relevant
number of students. This fact implies that when following
TCM, time of the face-to-face classes needs to be
employed in reviewing the needed previous knowledge,
with the subsequent loss of time; otherwise, some topics
are difficult to be followed by the students. Finally, con-
cerning the grades obtained by the students in the same
period, the vast majority (88 %) got grades ranging
between 5 and 6, in a 10-point scale, the minimum range to
pass the course. Less than 1 % got grades ranging between
9 and 10.
Methodology
To assess the suitability of the IIM, the class was randomly
divided in two groups of 51 and 52 students each: In the
first group, a TCS was followed, while in the second group,
an IIM was used. A comparison study, in terms of student’s
performance and perception, was applied to evaluate the
IIM methodology. Assessment results and post-task ques-
tionnaires were the quantitative instruments employed on
Fig. 1 Traditional classroom setting versus inverted classroom model
(Christiansen 2014; Moraros et al. 2015)
123
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
this study. Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of the
proposed methodology.
Classroom Context
Group 1: Traditional Classroom Setting
The traditional setting was consisting of 3 sessions of
50 min of weekly theoretical lectures in front of overhead
presentation and 1 session of 50 min of weekly laboratory
experiences related to the contents taught in the theoretical
classes. All students had access to a virtual campus, where
classroom presentations and laboratory instructions were
available a week before class. Lectures were broken up
anytime during the class when students needed additional
explanations or to work on short in-class problems and
little small tasks. During the course, five different lessons
were taught, following the university official syllabus. At
the end of each lesson, students were given a take-home
problem set and were asked to complete an online quiz
questionnaire to help them to review the lesson. These
activities were not compulsory, but worth an additional
10 % in their grade.
Concerning the laboratory sessions, students were pro-
vided with a laboratory agenda, with detailed instructions
to carry out experimental demonstrations of the theoretical
contents or to perform small-guided research work. The
laboratory sessions were compulsory for all students.
Before the laboratory sessions, students were asked to read
the instructions and all questions were solved before
starting. At the end of the semester, students were asked to
submit the laboratory diary together with a report
addressing all questions arose during the semester, worth
30 % of the student grade.
To complete the subject assessment, a final examination
was scheduled at the end of the semester. The final
examination consisted in a set of problematic situations
where students had to apply not only the theoretical con-
tents, taught in lectures, but also practical knowledge
learned during the laboratory sessions.
Group 2: Flipped Classroom Setting
Students following the IIM teaching methodology had same
class scheme as the one used in the TCS (3 sessions of
50 min weekly to work theoretical contents and 50 min
weekly of laboratory works). For this methodology, all
students had access to a virtual campus, where classroom
presentations and laboratory instructions were available a
week before class, together with video lessons. For this
asynchronous lecture delivery, Doceri and Screenflow were
used to elaborate the video lessons. The capabilities of
Doceri software have been reported before, proving to be a
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
very useful alternative in delivery of science courses by
resident instruction, distance learning to multiple campuses,
synchronous online instruction and asynchronous online
instruction (Silverberg et al. 2014). Students were encour-
aged to watch the lecture videos before class, according to a
schedule. To make the video lectures more appealing to
students, the online learning environment ‘‘eduCanon’’ was
used to create interactive lessons (Fig. 2). Precisely, quiz
questionnaires and comments were inserted into the lectures
to increase the student engagement and to provide emphasis
or additional information in the more difficult contents.
Beside the video lessons, students were also provided with
multiple-choice online quizzes to revise lecture contents
and to provide a feedback to the instructor before class in
order to deliver short ‘‘just-in-time’’ lectures as needed.
These activities were not compulsory, but worth an addi-
tional 10 % in their grade. Therefore, with this teaching
scheme, students spent in-class time working in assigned
groups on different problem set (numerical and non-nu-
merical) designed by the professor or using published
material, small group discussion and case studies, where the
instructor gave students a real-world problematic situations
related to the lesson contents reviewed in the video lessons.
The instructor role in these sessions was to observe, address
Fig. 2 Screenshots of a video lesson example where questions are inserted in the video using the online learning environment ‘‘eduCanon’’
(a) and the final video that will be delivered to the students through an online platform (b)
453
concerns and deliver explanations when needed. By the end
of each lessons, students had to submit a report with all
tasks accomplished for its assessment. These activities were
compulsory and worth 30 % of their grade.
Following similar scheme as in the TCS, in the labora-
tory sessions, students were provided a laboratory agenda,
with detailed instructions to carry out experimental
demonstrations of the theoretical contents or to perform
small-guided research work. Before the laboratory ses-
sions, students were also provided with short video
instructions detailing all the aspects (theoretical and prac-
tical) involved in the laboratory work. In this case, video
instructions were published in Internet (free access) to help
other students not enrolling in this class with their labo-
ratory exercises (Fig. 3). At the end of the semester, stu-
dents were asked to submit the laboratory diary together
with a report addressing all questions arose during the
semester, worth 30 % of their grade.
To complete the subject assessment, a final examination
was scheduled at the end of the semester. The final
examination consisted in a set of problematic situations
where students had to apply not only the theoretical con-
tents, taught in lectures, but also practical knowledge learnt
during the laboratory classes.
123
454
Fig. 3 Process to make a video
lesson from a PowerPoint
presentation using Screenflow
software application. The final
video is available in an open
online platform
Student Perceptions
With the aim of gauging students’ perception toward the
IIM, a post-task questionnaire survey was conducted.
Students were surveyed at the end of the course. The
questionnaire followed a four-point Likert-type scale. The
test consisted in 8 closed questions and an open-ended
question where the students could provide their opinion
about the followed methodology (IIM).
The questionnaire included eight simple questions
regarding the overall students experience about the pro-
posed teaching methodology, and it was delivered to stu-
dents by an online platform. Questions are listed in
Table 2. Questions were grouped in two sections, the first
one (Q1 to Q6, Table 2) consisted on questions about how
useful was the IIM to achieve the learning objectives. For
instance, questions such as ‘‘In your opinion, watching
video-lessons before the class has allowed you to achieve
more efficiently the learning objectives’’ were used in this
survey section. The second part of the questionnaire (Q7 to
123
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
Q8, Table 2) was intended to verify the students’ percep-
tion about how useful was the course for their professional
training as future teachers. In this case, questions such as
‘‘In your opinion, the classes (including laboratory) con-
tents have satisfied your professional training needs as
future teacher’’ were asked. Finally, an open-ended ques-
tion was included in the questionnaire to collect any
additional comment that students wanted to add.
Statistical Analysis
The students’ performance for the different teaching
methodologies was compared in terms of their average
grades. In order to establish the presence of significant
differences, a two-tailed, two-sample t test for independent
unequal sample size was conducted. The Satterthwaite’s
approximation for the effective degrees of freedom was
applied. All calculations were done using an open-code
source available for MATLAB.
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
Results and Discussion
Performance Evaluation
The studies were conducted in a general science class,
sophomore of the Primary Education bachelor degree in the
Training Teaching School of the University of Extrema-
dura (Spain) during the course 2014/2015. General science
course is a compulsory subject that all students must take in
order to complete their studies. According to the statistical
data provided by the university for the last 5 years, students
have always had difficulties in completing this subject
satisfactorily, in comparison with the whole program
average. In fact, in this period of time students took aver-
age 2.5 years to pass this subject. More over, a small
percentage of students took more than 4 years to complete
satisfactorily the subject. Finally, more than 88 % of stu-
dents’ grades in this period were between 5 and 6 in a 0–10
scale, where getting \5 means failing.
In order to gauge the success or otherwise of the pro-
posed methodology, the assessment results for the different
course activities were compared. Table 1 summarized the
results obtained for both teaching methodologies. A total of
64 students passed the subject in this course, meaning that
39 student will need to take again the course the following
semester. Among these students, 29 and 35 belonged to the
TCS and IIM groups, respectively. From these students, 14
and 23 were taking the course for the first time, respec-
tively, for the TCS and IIM groups. Therefore, the per-
centage of students who completed satisfactorily the
subject at the end of the course was 56.7 % in the TCS,
considering the final examination and the in-class evalua-
tion. Regarding the IIM, the percentage of students passing
the subject was of 67.3 %, considering as well the final
examination and in-class evaluation. Although these per-
centages were lower than the average passing rate of the
general science course in previous years, the passing rate
for the IIM overpasses the passing rate in the group of
students who followed the TCS.
The assessment results for the different type of tasks
were made by means of a 10-point scale and are graphi-
cally summarized in Fig. 4. For both methodologies,
Table 1 Summary of the assessment results of the different course activities for both teaching methodologies (inverse instruction methodology
(IIM) setting and the traditional classroom (TC) setting)
Teaching No. Passing Non-compulsory Laboratory
methodology students rate (%) activities grade grades
TCS 51 56.6 7.01 ± 2.05 5.57 ± 2.16
IIM 52 67.1 8.01 ± 1.06 7.71 ± 1.04
t test – – – –
*** Express the existence of statistical differences at significance level of p \ 0.05
455
students achieved good results in the not-compulsory
exercises overtaken during the classes (7.01 ± 2.05 for the
TCS vs. 8.01 ± 1.06 for the IIM). Regarding the class and
laboratory points, students’ grades following IIM method-
ology were higher, in average terms, than the students
following the TCS (5.57 ± 2.16 for the TCS vs.
7.71 ± 1.04 for the IIM). Finally, the figure also summa-
rized the points obtained in the final exam. In this case, the
average points obtained by the students following the TCS
were 3.52 ± 2.22 points, being 0 points the lower score
obtained and 6.59 higher. In contrast, students following
the IIM methodology obtained an average grade of
6.23 ± 1.81 points, being 0 points the lower score and 9.8
higher. Considering the assessment criteria established for
this course, a total of 29 and 35 students passed following
the TCS and IIM, respectively. Final examination grades
were compared by means of the two-tailed, two-sample
t test for independent unequal sample size from normal
distributions. The Satterthwaite’s approximation for the
effective degrees of freedom was applied. The t test results
show that the null hypothesis should be rejected at the 0.01
significant level, which means that students grades in the
IIM were significantly higher than the grades obtained by
the students in the TCS. This information is summarized in
Table 1.
Previously published studies (Blair et al. 2015) regard-
ing the student’s performance show that there is not suf-
ficient evidence to support claims about the benefits of the
IIM in the students’ performance. Similar conclusions are
described in a limited study (Christiansen 2014) under-
taken in a much smaller class group. Besides, other study
carried out in an algebra course (Love et al. 2013) shows
no significant differences between the flipped classroom
and traditional students’ grades. In our study, although a
significant difference is observed between both mean val-
ues, this study must be completed with a bigger sample and
in different years, in order to confirm the tendency. Similar
conclusions were reported for an engineering course
(Mason et al. 2013). In this study, students’ performance
was significantly higher when a flipped model was
followed. Davies et al. (2013) explored how technology
can be used to teach technological skills and to determine
Final exam No. students No. students passing the course
passing the course first time of enrolling
3.52 ± 2.22 29 14
6.23 ± 1.81 35 23
*** – –
123
456
Fig. 4 Summary of the
performance evaluation of the
inverse instruction methodology
(IIM) setting and the traditional
classroom (TC) setting
what benefit flipping the classroom might have for under-
graduate students taking an introductory-level college
course on spreadsheets at Brigham Young University.
Authors concluded that the flipped classroom approach
allowed students to learn course content at their own pace,
and students were not required to come to class unless they
needed help beyond the asynchronous materials, allowing
them to make better use of their time and improving their
perception of the class. However, the flipped approach was
also better than the regular approach for delivering this
course but not significantly.
Perception Evaluation
After the instruction, a post-task questionnaire was carried
out to evaluate students perception to the IIM was con-
ducted. The questionnaire followed a four-point Likert-
type scale. The test consisted in 8 closed questions and an
open-ended question where the students could provide their
opinion about the followed methodology (IIM). Table 2
shows the results of the survey.
According to the opinions collected from the students,
there is a general positive opinion about the inverse
instruction methodology employed for this class. In fact,
nearly 97 % of students, who provided answers, considered
that watching video lessons before attending class was very
meaningful in order to succeed in the proposed learning
goals (Q1). With regard to the video material provided,
students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement
‘‘Video-lessons material was correctly designed, well
structured and clearly-defined’’ (Q2). Only a small per-
centage (3 %) found the video material not appropriated in
terms of design, structure or definition. Video lessons were
recorded using commonly available software, such as
PowerPoint slides or Doceri (Fig. 5), which have proved to
123
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
be effective delivering multimedia science contents
(Fitzgerald and Li 2015; Silverberg et al. 2014). These later
tools were particularly used to solve numerical exercises
step-by-step.
In all cases, videos were available in the virtual campus
and also in open-access platforms. Regarding how useful
were the provided materials, in terms of achieving the
learning objectives, 3 % strongly agree and 11 % agree
with the statement ‘‘In your opinion, it was not necessary to
provide video-lessons in order to achieve laboratory and
class learning objectives’’ (Q3). These percentages contrast
with the high number of students (86 %) who found the
video lessons very instructive and useful for achieving the
learning goals. In fact, students who did not watch videos
before the synchronous class felt significantly more behind
than those who did. Thus, during class, when students were
required to participate in discussions and hands-on pro-
jects, they could not follow the class activities.
The video lessons provided in the flipped classroom
methodology were complemented with multiple-choice
online quizzes to revise lecture contents and to provide a
feedback to the instructor before class in order to deliver
short ‘‘just-in-time’’ lectures as needed. Two types of
questionnaires were provided to the students; the first type
consisted in multiple-choice online quizzes about the
contents taught in the video lessons that students had to
complete after watching or/and reading the proposed
material. The second type of quizzes was questionnaires
inserted in the video lessons. In these cases, students had to
provide the right answer in order to be able to watch the
remaining part of the video, trying in that way, to engage
the students to watch completely and effectively the video
lessons. When students were asked about how the com-
pletion of multiple-choice online quizzes after watching the
delivered video lesson has allowed them to achieve more
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459 457

Table 2 Post-task survey items and comparative survey results concerning students’ perception of the IIM
Items for response Students’
responses (%)
SD D A SA

Q1: In your opinion, watching video-lessons before the class has allowed you to achieve more efficiently the learning 3 0 43 54
objectives
Q2: Video-lessons material was correctly designed, well structured and clearly-defined 0 3 59 38
Q3: In your opinion, it was not necessary to provide video-lessons in order to achieve laboratory and class learning 27 59 11 3
objectives
Q4: The completion of multiple-choice on-line quizzes after watching the delivered video-lesson has allowed to achieve 3 11 49 38
more efficiently the laboratory class learning objectives
Q5: The completion of multiple-choice on-line quizzes after watching the delivered video-lesson has allowed to point out 3 8 62 27
the most complex contents before the class, and therefore to focus to overcome them
Q6: The doubts emerged before and during the class sessions (including laboratory) were adequately addressed and solve 0 5 65 30
out
Q7: In your opinion, the classes (including laboratory) were useful for your professional training as future teacher 0 0 49 51
Q8: In your opinion, the classes (including laboratory) contents have satisfied your professional training needs as future 0 8 62 30
teacher
SD strongly disagree, D disagree, A agree, SA strongly agree
N = 52

Fig. 5 How to make an

instructional video and its
further online publication with
the aid of Doceri software
application

efficiently the laboratory class learning objectives (Q4), achieve the learning objectives. In their opinion, these
they agreed or strongly agreed that the quizzes provided questionnaires contribute to focus in the relevant contents
together with the multimedia material had allowed them to and to arise doubts to be solved in class. In fact, nearly

123
458
90 % of students were able to point out the most complex
contents before the class and therefore to focus to over-
come them after completing the online quizzes provided
with the video lessons (Q5). On the other hand, from the
instructor point of view, having the result of the ques-
tionnaires ‘‘just-in-time’’ also allows blending the teaching
to overcome the difficulties found by the students, to
identify the main difficulties for students, to redirect the
class and definitely to use more efficiently the class time. In
fact, 95 % of the students solved their doubts during the
lecture and laboratory class (Q6).
With regard to the open-ended question, responses were
in general supportive with the followed methodology. The
comments provided by the students pointed out the major
benefits of the IIM from the students’ point of view.
Generally, all the students agreed that the flipped instruc-
tion method provided them the possibility to work auton-
omously and in their own place, and the possibility of re-
watching the multimedia material was of great help,
especially for the students to catch up on missed materials.
Some of the comments provided by the students concern-
ing the IIM were: ‘‘The possibility of watching the class
material at home before classes, make us to have more time
to think about the contents and to solve our doubts in class
time,’’ ‘‘If we do not understand some topic, we just have
to watch the video again,’’ ‘‘Completing the in-class
activities before watching the video lessons at home was
much easier,’’ ‘‘Although some video lessons could be
improved, in general they were very useful,’’ ‘‘It would be
great having more online test together with the video-les-
sons.’’ Similar studies indicate that this opinion is general
for the flipped classroom setting (Blair et al. 2015; Mason
et al. 2013); also some authors have indicated that IIM
increased the students’ motivation to study (Tune et al.
2013). Davies et al. (2013) informed that one area in which
technology can be valuable is presenting content. In our
study, students’ responses also highlighted that video les-
sons were particularly useful for understanding challenging
contents, since they allow them to find out the difficulties
and the way to solve them. In addition, students’ comments
also supported the idea that the video lesson engaged them
more effectively to the course class and fostered their
participation in the in-class activities. However, they also
admitted that having the material watched not granted
passing the course. Finally, they agreed to say that the
flipped activities were more students’ oriented than the
traditional settings, especially they felt that the face-to-face
classes under IIM were 100 % students’ oriented, since the
class did not consist in exhibition of contents, but in
solving their doubts, reinforcing their ‘‘weak points,’’
etcetera. The results described above about the perception
of students toward the flipped methodologies are coinci-
dent with previously published studies which highlight that
123
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
this methodology is generally well received by students
(Blair et al. 2015; Christiansen 2014; Gilboy et al. 2015;
Kim et al. 2014; Love et al. 2013; Moraros et al. 2015;
Roach 2014). A limiting factor of the IIM methodology is
how available is the Internet to the students, since they
should have access to all online material at home. The lack
of an effective Internet connection or having enough
bandwidth could be a limiting factor for the IIM (Chen
et al. 2014).
Finally, the post-task survey also included two items
about the general perception of student about how useful
were the classes (including laboratory) for their profes-
sional training as future teacher (Q7) and whether the
course has satisfied their professional training needs as
future teacher (Q8), regardless of the pedagogical
methodology used. Regarding Q7, all the students strongly
agreed (51 %) or agreed (49 %) with the formulated
statement, although 8 % of students found that the course
did not satisfy there professional needs (Q8).
Conclusions
This research aimed to assess the suitability of the IIM
usability in terms of students’ performance and perception,
comparing the results with a TCS. The study was con-
ducted in a general science course, sophomore of the Pri-
mary Education bachelor degree in the Training Teaching
School of the University of Extremadura (Spain) during the
course 2014/2015. According to the data for the last 5
courses, general science course could be considered as a
tough subject, since students took an average of 2.5 years
to pass satisfactorily the course.
Performance was measured in terms of the number of
students passing the course the same year they enrolled for
the first time, as well as the grades obtained in the final
examination and other exercises taken during classes and
laboratory when a IIM was used as instruction methodol-
ogy. These figures were compared with the results obtained
by the students when a TCS was followed. According to
our results, better outcomes were achieved when the IIM
was followed. The percentage of students passing the
subject in the same year for the first time increased in more
than 10 %. Regarding the final exam, students’ grades in
the IIM were significantly higher than the grades obtained
by the students in the traditional setting. Similar differ-
ences were also observed in the laboratory and in-class
assessments taken during the course.
According to the students’ perception, there is a general
positive opinion about the IIM employed for this class. The
majority of the students found useful or very useful of the
video lessons provided in the IIM, not only for achieving
the learning objectives but also to engage them more
J Sci Educ Technol (2016) 25:450–459
effectively with the course contents. They also highlighted
that the flipped activities were more students’ oriented than
the traditional settings. Generally, all the students agreed
that the flipped instruction method provided them the
possibility to work autonomously and in their own place,
and the possibility of re-watching the multimedia material
was of great help, especially for the students to catch up on
missed materials.
Although the results obtained in this study allow draw-
ing a promising tendency about the students’ performance
and perception toward the flipped classroom methodology,
this study has to be considered as an initial approach and
must be completed including more courses data and the
considerations of professors and instructors. However,
taking into account the innovative features of IIM
methodology and its poor implantation in routine teaching
in comparison with TCS methodology, studies like the one
we are presenting, in which its effectiveness is judged, are
strongly welcome within the teaching community.
Acknowledgments This work was founded by the Ministry of
Economy and Competitiveness of Spain (Research Project EDU2012-
34140) and European Regional Development Fund (Project GR15009
of Govern of Extremadura).
References
Beichner RJ, Saul JM (2003) Introduction to the SCALE-UP
(Student-Centered activities for large enrolment undergraduate
programs) project. Proceeding of the international school of
physics ‘‘Enrico Fermi’’, Varenna, Italy
Bergmann J, Sams A (2014) Flipped learning: maximizing face time.
Train Dev 68:28–31
Bishop JL, Verleger M (2013) The flipped classroom: a survey of the
research. Paper presented at the 120th ASEE Annual Conference
& Exposition, Antlanta, GA
Blair E, Maharaj C, Primus S (2015) Performance and perception in
the flipped classroom. Educ Inf Technol. doi:10.1007/s10639-
015-9393-5
Chen Y, Wang Y, Chen NS (2014) Is FLIP enough? or should we use
the FLIPPED model instead? Comput Educ 79:16–27. doi:10.
1016/j.compedu.2014.07.004
Christiansen Michael A (2014) Inverted teaching: applying a new
pedagogy to a university organic chemistry class. J Chem Educ
91(11):1845–1850. doi:10.1021/ed400530z
Davies RS, Dean DL, Ball N (2013) Flipping the classroom and
instructional technology integration in a college-level informa-
tion systems spreadsheet course. Educ Tech Res Dev
61(4):563–580
Ferreri SP, O’Connor SK (2013) Redesign of a large lecture course
into a small-group learning course. Am J Pharm Educ 77(1):13.
doi:10.5688/ajpe77113
Fitzgerald N, Li L (2015) Using presentation software to flip an
undergraduate analytical chemistry course. J Chem Educ. doi:10.
1021/ed500667c
459
Gilboy Mary Beth, Heinerichs Scott, Pazzaglia Gina (2015) Enhanc-
ing student engagement using the flipped classroom. J Nutr Educ
Behav 47(1):109–114. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008
Handelsman J, Ebert-May D, Beichner R, Bruns P, Chang A, DeHaan
R, Gentile J, Lauffer S, Steart J, Tilghman SM, Wood WB
(2004) Policy forum: scientific teaching. Science 304:521–522
Hill JR, Song L, West RE (2009) Social learning theory and web-
based learning environments: a review of research and discus-
sion of implications. Am J Distance Educ 23(2):88–103. doi:10.
1080/08923640902857713
Kim MK, Kim SM, Khera O, Getman J (2014) The experience of
three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of
design principles. Internet High Educ 22:37–50. doi:10.1016/j.
iheduc.2014.04.003
Knight JK, Wood WB (2005) Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell
Biol Educ 4:298–310
Love Betty, Hodge Angie, Grandgenett Neal, Swift Andrew W (2013)
Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra
course. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol 45(3):317–324. doi:10.
1080/0020739X.2013.822582
Mason GS, Rutar TS, Cook KE (2013) Comparing the effectiveness
of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-
division engineering course. Educ IEEE Trans 56(4):430–435.
doi:10.1109/TE.2013.2249066
Mattis KV (2014) Flipped classroom versus traditional textbook
instruction: assessing accuracy and mental effort at different
levels of mathematical complexity. Technol Knowl Learn.
doi:10.1007/s10758-014-9238-0
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 Med Educ. doi:10.
1186/s12909-015-0317-2
O’Flaherty J, Phillips C (2015) The use of flipped classrooms in
higher education: a scoping review. Internet High Educ
25:85–95. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002
Roach T (2014) Student perceptions toward flipped learning: new
methods to increase interaction and active learning in eco-
nomics. Int Rev Econ Educ 17:74–84. doi:10.1016/j.iree.2014.
08.003
Sams A, Bergmann J (2013) Flip your students’ learning. Technol
Rich Learn 70(6):16–20
Silverberg Lee J, Tierney John, Bodek Matthew J (2014) Use of
doceri software for iPad in online delivery of chemistry content.
J Chem Educ 91(11):1999–2001. doi:10.1021/ed4009057
Sowa L, Thorsen D (2015) An assessment of student learning,
perceptions and social capital development in undergraduate,
lower-division STEM courses employing a flipped classroom
pedagogy. Paper presented at the 122nd ASEE Annual Confer-
ence & Exposition, Seattle, WA
Tourón J, Santiago R (2015) Flipped learning model and the
development of talent at school. Revista de Educ 368:33–65.
doi:10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2015-368-288
Tucker B (2012) The flipped classroom. Online instruction at home
frees class for learning. Educ Next 12(1):82–83
Tune JD, Sturek M, Basile DP (2013) Flipped classroom model
improves graduate student performance in cardiovascular, res-
piratory, and renal physiology. Adv Physiol Educ 11(3):57–77
Young JR (2002) ‘‘Hybrid’’ teaching seeks to end the divide between
traditional and online instruction. Chron High Educ 48(28):A33–
A34
123