Sustainability 14 05983 v3

sustainability
Article
Using the Flipped Classroom to Promote Learner Engagement
for the Sustainable Development of Language Skills: A Mixed-
Methods Study
Zhiyong Li 1 and Jiaying Li 2, *
1 Department of Public English Education, Nankai University Binhai College, Tianjin 300270, China;
songlasses@163.com
2 Nankai University Library, Nankai University, Tianjin 300270, China
* Correspondence: ryecandy@163.com
Abstract: In second language education, the flipped classroom has been widely researched and
increasingly applied as a teaching approach to improve the academic performance and engagement
of English as a foreign language learners. However, learner engagement is a multidimensional
construct, and not much empirical evidence exists about whether the flipped classroom can lead to
a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement
in the EFL class. To fill this gap, this study adopted a mixed-methods research approach to eval-
uate the impact of the flipped College English Listening and Speaking class on four-dimension
learner engagement in a mainland China context. After an eight-week intervention we compared
the experimental group (the flipped class, N = 34) and the control group (the non-flipped class,
N = 35). Findings demonstrate that after eight weeks of flipped instruction, students in the flipped
class achieved higher mean scores on the post-test engagement questionnaires in behavioural, emo-
tional, cognitive, and social engagement. However, the difference in emotional engagement between
Citation: Li, Z.; Li, J. Using the
Flipped Classroom to Promote
the flipped and non-flipped classes was not statistically significant. Semi-structured interviews
Learner Engagement for the revealed several factors responsible for learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom. Positive
Sustainable Development of influencing factors were learning environment, instructor presence, learning content, and learner
Language Skills: A Mixed-Methods presence, whereas negative aspects included the excessive workload on learners, lack of learning
Study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5983. preparedness, lengthy videos, and technical challenges. Based on the findings, we would argue that
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105983 the instructor and other educational stakeholders should provide more support to cater to learners’
Academic Editors: Lawrence
emotional engagement and help learners cope with the challenges encountered throughout the
Jun Zhang, Vincent T. Greenier and flipped learning process. The study may assist teaching professionals and researchers obtain a clearer
Jozsef Mezei understanding of flipped instruction in the EFL context and design and implement the flipped class
by considering the positive and negative elements affecting learner engagement.
Received: 5 April 2022
Accepted: 13 May 2022
Keywords: flipped classroom; learner engagement; English as a foreign language; listening and speaking
Published: 14 May 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil- 1. Introduction
iations.
In the 21st century, the near ubiquity of modern technology means that language
teachers can rely on a wide range of technological products to promote the sustainable
development of learners’ engagement [1,2]. For example, TV sets, radios, mobile phones,
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
and the Internet have reached almost every household, providing learners easy access to
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. rich learning materials. Against this backdrop, language instructors need to find appropri-
This article is an open access article ate technological tools to create a facilitative language environment to initiate and sustain
distributed under the terms and learners’ interests and engagement. It is generally accepted that once learners are engaged
conditions of the Creative Commons in a course, they become active learners, proactively spending time and effort to regulate
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// their behaviours, achieve better performance, and develop higher learning efficacy [1,3,4].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Learner engagement refers to the sustained action and effort learners spend to reach
4.0/). pre-decided goals [5]. Fredricks et al. [6] categorise learner engagement as a behavioural,
Sustainability 2022, 14, 5983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105983 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 5983 2 of 22
affective, and cognitive construct, whereas Zhou et al. [7] add social engagement as an
essential component in language learning. The bright prospect of applying modern tech-
nology to promote learner engagement has stimulated EFL (English as a foreign language)
teachers and researchers to look for approaches to transform conventional teaching to
create an engaging learning environment. In this background, the flipped classroom has
gained popularity, especially after Bergmann and Sams [8] adopted and promoted the
flipped approach to help students unable to attend class. The flipped classroom refers to
the inversion of traditional classroom procedures by providing in-class contents before class
so that instructors can focus on addressing students’ needs during the class [8]. The flipped
instruction conforms to language acquisition because it exposes learners to linguistic knowl-
edge before the class and scaffolds learners for interactive-based tasks during the class.
It frees up students’ time and is more interactive, flexible, engaging, and dynamic than
traditional classrooms because learners taking the flipped class have more opportunities to
learn pre-class materials at their own pace and join various interactive-based activities in
the class [4,9,10].
Previous research has shown that the flipped classroom can enhance EFL learners’
academic performance in reading, writing, speaking, and listening [3,4,9–11]. The research
also shows that the flipped classroom can lead to improvement in learners’ perceptions,
learning experience, attitudes, motivation, willingness to communicate, and autonomy
in the EFL class [11,12]. Nevertheless, studies relating to the flipped class do not always
generate positive outcomes, as some researchers have found some negative results of the
flipped instruction, such as the extra workload on both teachers and learners, teachers’
pedagogical uncertainty, learners being unable to complete pre-class assignments and
shying away from interactive activities during the class, and the inadequate support from
educational institutions [9,10]. Bergmann and Sams [8] (p. 102) also warned that almost 10%
of students failed in their flipped courses. The inconsistency in the effectiveness of flipped
classrooms suggests that flipped classrooms are context-specific and should be studied and
implemented with the awareness of the uniqueness of teaching and learning contexts.
In addition, although there has been an increasing number of research aimed at investi-
gating the effects of the flipped classroom in EFL classrooms on academic performance and
psychological variables such as motivation, autonomy, and willingness to communicate,
research into the impact of the flipped classroom on learners’ engagement in the flipped
EFL classroom is relatively limited [3,13,14]. Arguably, there remains a need to gain a
more comprehensive and deeper understanding of learner engagement in the language
classroom so that teaching professionals can effectively design their classes to improve
engagement levels. Furthermore, learner engagement is multidimensional and subject to
the influence of the context where learning and teaching are situated, and therefore, merits
further explorations.
To address the above issues, this study investigates the effect of the flipped classroom
on the behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement of EFL learners who take
a college listening and speaking course in the higher education context in mainland China.
This study also strives to identify what factors contribute to learner engagement. The
findings may help teaching professionals and researchers to gain a better understanding
of contextual factors affecting the implementation of a flipped classroom in the situated
teaching and learning context. In addition, the findings can shed some light on educational
stakeholders in providing adequate support for higher levels of learner engagement in the
flipped EFL context.
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Flipped Classroom
The flipped classroom has embraced increased popularity and reputation because of
its communicative-based, learner-centred approach to teaching and learning. Its name and
definition vary in different contexts. It is termed the inverted classroom, which means
“the events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside
the classroom and vice versa” [15] (p. 32). The flipped classroom also corresponds to
just-in-time teaching, the essence of which is that Web-based pre-instruction assignments,
mainly in the form of “warm-up questions” [16] (p. 63), are given to students so that they
can think about the questions before arriving at the classroom; inside the classroom, there
will be discussions on the questions to elicit and stimulate learners’ interest and promote
their critical thinking.
Bishop and Verleger [17] define flipped classrooms as computer-based video lectures
carried out outside the classrooms, and interaction-based, group-centred learning taking
place in the classroom. Bishop and Verleger maintain that a flipped classroom should
include computer-based pre-class individual instructions while excluding test-based ma-
terials and other non-video sources. Hung [4] argues that the flipped classroom is an
enhanced teaching approach that employs educational technology to improve a student’s
learning experience and active learning and that the pre-class assignment comes in various
forms, such as self-made and ready-made videos, reading quizzes, and worksheets. As
Bond [18] claims, disagreement still exists over the flipped classroom’s exact definition
and design principles. In this research, we combined Bishop and Verleger’s and Hung’s
definitions of the flipped classroom. In the pre-class assignment materials, we utilised
video clips, audio-recordings, worksheets and reading quizzes to prepare learners before
class for interactive-based collaborative learning inside the class. We also divided the
flipped EFL class into pre-class, during-class, and after-class phases.
2.2. Learner Engagement

2.2.1. The Learner Engagement Definition
Learner engagement occupies a central place in education and has been increasingly
studied and discussed in the academic field. Lawson and Lawson [5] maintain engagement
should be defined as an action, which refers to the effort learners take to reach pre-decided
goals. This view is shared by Skinner et al., who refer to engagement as “energised, directed,
and sustained actions” [19] (p. 225). Researchers in language studies, such as Bygate and
Samuda [20], define engagement as the efforts and resources learners utilise to achieve
language learning objectives. In fact, engagement is challenging to define due to contextual
sensitivity, but it is a commonly accepted practice to define engagement by the active,
participatory aspect [6,21,22].
To understand engagement, we need to distinguish it from motivation. The two terms
are often used intermittently to describe a learner’s involvement in L2 tasks. There are
apparent differences, however. Motivation refers to the interest and mental forces that
drive one person to take actions in learning, whereas engagement means the actual actions
taken [1]. Thus, the difference between motivation and engagement is whether there is an
action taken after learners demonstrate an interest in and enthusiasm for learning tasks. In
other words, motivation is related to a range of psychological factors that may facilitate
engagement, whereas engagement is the manifestation of the multiple psychological factors
interacting in the given context. Motivation can be an antecedent for engaged actions [19].
Motivation and engagement are different but inseparable and the two terms can mutually
reinforce each other.
2.2.2. The Construct of Learner Engagement

Finn [21] categorises learner engagement as participation and identification. Participa-
tion refers to students’ learning behaviours, including whether they observe school rules,
respond to teacher instructions, and complete assignments on time. Identification is related
to affective engagement, such as whether students have developed a sense of belonging to
the learning community and whether they have a positive relationship with the institution
and staff. However, Finn’s engagement construct is limited to only the behavioural and af-
fective aspects. Student engagement may go beyond behavioural and affective dimensions
and be understood from psychological and social-cultural perspectives [23].
Fredricks et al. [6] provided a more comprehensive categorisation of student engage-

ment, and they divided engagement into behavioural engagement, affective engagement,
and cognitive engagement. Behavioural engagement could be observed by studying how
students behave in the classroom and at school and whether they are actively involved
in learning tasks and school activities. Emotional/affective engagement refers to student
emotions such as happiness, sadness, boredom, anxiety, interest, confidence, and enthusi-
asm displayed in the learning process. Finally, cognitive engagement is defined as students’
mental effort in learning and self-reflection of their learning strategies, which could be ob-
served by analysing students’ reflective learning journals and self-report questionnaires [6].
In addition to behavioural, emotional/affective, and cognitive engagement, social
engagement has gained scholarly interest. Advocates of social-cultural theories posit that
learners’ behaviour, affect, and cognition come from their interactions in a specific social
and cultural context. Social-political factors, the culture in an institution, and the cultural
backgrounds of individual learners all impact how students behave and perceive their
learning environment. In particular, social engagement can be generated through social
interactions with others in the classroom, including learners’ sense of identity, satisfaction,
and well-being constructed in interacting with peers, teachers, and other individuals in
the academic community [23]. In the language learning environment, social engagement
is viewed as a social form of activity and individual involvement in the communities of
language acquisition, where communications with interlocutors and the quality of the
communications are taken into consideration [24,25]. Hiver et al. maintain that “the social
dimension can be distinguished from other forms of engagement when considering that it is
explicitly relational in nature and its purpose is interaction with and support of others” [7]
(p. 78). Svalberg posits that social engagement is a process and a state. The process refers
to learners “initiating and interacting with others” in the language classroom, whereas the
state refers to “learners’ behavioural readiness to interact” [26] (p. 246).
In the engagement scale developed by Wang et al. [27] (pp. 592–606), social engage-
ment contains interactions with peers, the instructor, and the broader community. Hiver
et al. [28] (pp. 1–12) designed and validified behavioural, emotional, and cognitive en-
gagement questionnaires in the L2 context, but the authors had not yet constructed social
engagement questionnaires. Thus, in this research, social engagement questionnaires were
adapted from Wang et al.’s study, and the other three engagement dimensions were adapted
from Hiver et al. (see Table 1).
Table 1. Four-dimension learner engagement and the indicators.
Learners’ active participation and

Behavioural engagement Hiver et al. [28]
involvement in classroom L2 learning.
Learners’ positive emotional reactions
Emotional engagement Hiver et al. [28] to teachers, peers, and
L2 classroom activities.
Learners’ level of attention and
Cognitive engagement Hiver et al. [28] investment of effort and strategy use in
classroom L2 learning.
Learners’ social interactions and
Social engagement Wang et al. [27] relationships with peers and others in
classroom L2 learning.
2.3. Learner Engagement in the Flipped EFL Classroom

Several research papers have emerged to investigate how flipped classrooms enhance
students’ active learning and engagement in the English language classroom in the context
of higher education. For example, the study by Hung [4] reported the positive impact
of flipped classrooms on students. Through the experimental design involving both the
experimental (flipped classrooms) and control groups (non-flipped classrooms) among
university students in Taiwan, he found that participants taught by the flipped model
had better English listening and speaking performance and had higher satisfaction with
the course, as compared to the non-flipped class. Specifically, the study revealed that
the students were engaged with the instructional materials, the format and structure
of learning materials, the use of technology, and the freedom of learning at their own
pace. However, the study does not specify which aspects of learner engagement have
been positively affected, as there is a blurred explanation of what engagement is. Lee and
Wallace [14] provided a more comprehensive account of student engagement in flipped EFL
classrooms by investigating 39 Korean university students. Through qualitative analysis,
the authors discovered that in comparison with the non-flipped classroom, students in the
flipped classroom demonstrated three engagement patterns: firstly, students raised more
questions in the class; secondly, students invested more time and effort in both the learning
process and the tasks; and thirdly, students had understood the content in a better and
more profound way. However, the study restricted engagement to indicators such as the
questions raised, the time and effort spent, and the course content.
Amiryousefi [3] adopted a mixed-methods study using learning experience ques-
tionnaires, tests, and time logs on 69 Iranian college students in traditional and flipped
EFL listening and speaking classrooms. Through the control and treatment groups, he
found that students in the flipped class showed more engagement with course materials
and content. Specifically, it was found that the flipped instruction made the class more
enjoyable, and made learners more confident, motivated, and more willing to communicate
than those in the non-flipped classroom. Students generally appreciated the meaningful
interactions taking place inside the classroom and the increased exposure to English out-
side the classroom. Nevertheless, the study covers a limited aspect of learner engagement.
Norazmi et al. [29] studied the impact of the flipped classroom on three dimensions of en-
gagement in a university in Malaysia. Based on Fredricks et al.’s engagement construct, the
questionnaire results showed that flipped classrooms could engage students behaviourally,
emotionally, and cognitively in the English for specific purposes course (Technical Writing).
In a similar study, Tran and Nguyen [13] deployed questionnaires and semi-structured
interviews to understand the behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement in an
English for tourism flipped class in Vietnam. The results indicate that students reported a
high-level of engagement with flipped classrooms. However, the limitation of the two stud-
ies above is the research design: the authors did not introduce the control group, thus we do
not know whether it is the flipped classroom that improved learner engagement. Therefore,
it is necessary to study the impact of the flipped instruction on learner engagement through
rigorous experimental design.
In mainland China, Jiao et al. [30] studied the effect of flipped classrooms on students
attending a college English writing course. By comparing the flipped and non-flipped
classes, they found that students in the flipped course had higher levels of emotional
engagement. Specifically, learners reported less emotional anxiety, more learning interest,
and higher confidence levels than those in the traditional classroom. The findings of Jiao
et al. were echoed by the experiment results of Huang [31], who discovered that the flipped
classroom could reduce the overall anxiety level among EFL learners in mainland China.
Although the two studies emphasised the emotional perspective of engagement, other
dimensions, such as behavioural and social engagement, remained underexplored. Gao
and Zhao [32] studied the effects of flipped classrooms on students taking the English
literature course at a university. Comparing the flipped and non-flipped classroom, they
found that students taking the flipped classes were more interested in the course and
demonstrated more willingness to engage in the pre-class and in-class activities; another
finding of this study is that learners’ original interest in studying English, the flipped
classroom design, and learners’ familiarity with learning platforms were the significant
factors affecting learners’ participation in the classroom. However, one potential issue
is that Gao and Zhao’s categorisation of learner engagement is only related to interest
(emotion) and participation (behaviour). More dimensions of learner engagement in the
EFL context awaits exploration.
Although most studies show positive correlations between flipped classrooms and
student engagement, the results are not always consistent. For example, Yang [33] reported
that flipped learning added to the learners’ workload; Zhang [34] found that flipped
instruction also increased teachers’ workload. In addition, Ekmekci [35] discovered that
some students experienced learning anxiety and nervousness due to the interactive nature
of flipped learning, whereas Egbert, Herman, and Lee [36] identified that some EFL learners
encountered technology and Internet-related problems. The flipped classroom may pose
challenges to teachers accustomed to traditional teaching approaches, and transforming
the teacher’s role from an instructor to a facilitator would be difficult [8]. Thus, the
inconsistency of research findings suggests that the impact of flipped instruction should be
studied in different teaching and learning contexts.
The literature review also indicates that in tertiary education, although many studies
show positive correlations between flipped classrooms and learner engagement, the studies
either give us only a partial picture of learner engagement or lack concrete evidence.
Therefore, more research needs to be conducted to understand whether flipped instruction
could lead to the sustainable development of learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive,
and social engagement in EFL contexts, especially in Chinese tertiary education.
2.4. The F-L-I-PTM Model

Flipped classrooms contain pre-class instructions, in-class interactive activities, and
after-class assignments. To further enhance the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and
better incorporate the flipped teaching to our teaching context, we draw on the F-L-I-
PTM model to guide the flipped classroom design. According to Hung [9] (p. 188), The
F-L-I-PTM model in the EFL context is explained in the following ways:
The F principle of a flexible language learning environment: provide comprehensible
input with flexibility and accommodate individual preferences and proficiency levels to
create acquisition-rich flipped classrooms for L2 learners.
The L principle of a language learning culture: offer interaction opportunities by using
active learning strategies to increase learners’ L2 exposure and use in the flipped classroom.
The I principle of intentional linguistic content: design a mechanism with intentional
content focusing on target meanings and forms of L2 to connect the pre-class and in-class
activities of the flipped classroom.
The P principle of a professional language educator: maintain up-to-date professional
knowledge and skills to build a transformative learning community in the flipped classroom
that empowers L2 learners to be active and responsible for their own learning [9] (p. 188).
Hung’s model has close relevance to the EFL context, and thus, can guide EFL teachers
to design the flipped classroom. In this research, the F-L-I-PTM Model was applied as a
framework to guide the design of this College English Listening and Speaking course.
2.5. Research Questions

Based on the reviewed literature above, this research adopts a mixed-methods design
to investigate the effect of a flipped EFL listening and speaking class on learners’ engage-
ment and identify the factors affecting their engagement in a Chinese university context.
The specific research questions are as follows:
(1) Does the flipped classroom lead to a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural,
emotional, cognitive, and social engagement in the flipped EFL classroom as compared
to the non-flipped classroom?
(2) What factors affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom?
3. Methodology
3.1. The Research Design
Creswell and Plano Clark [37] outline six categories of mixed-methods design accord-
ing to the level of interaction and timing, and the priority of the quantitative and qualitative
strands. This research adopts one type: the sequential explanatory design. The design
classroom as compared to the non-flipped classroom?
(2) What factors affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom?
3. Methodology
3.1. The Research Design
Creswell and Plano Clark [37] outline six categories of mixed-methods design ac-
cording to the level of interaction and timing, and the priority of the quantitative and
qualitative strands. This research adopts one type: the sequential explanatory design. The
contains two phases:
design contains the quantitative
two phases: and theand
the quantitative followed-up qualitative
the followed-up approach.
qualitative In this
approach.
research, we collected
In this research, and analysed
we collected the quantitative
and analysed data (engagement
the quantitative questionnaires)
data (engagement question-as
anaires)
priorityasto address to
a priority theaddress
first research
the firstquestion,
researchand after that,
question, and the qualitative
after data (semi-
that, the qualitative
structured interviews) interviews)
data (semi-structured were used towere verify andtocompare
used verify andwith the quantitative
compare data, as well
with the quantitative
as answer
data, the as
as well second
answer research question.
the second Thus,question.
research the sequential
Thus, explanatory
the sequential research design
explanatory
isresearch
an effective way to address the two research questions. Apart from
design is an effective way to address the two research questions. Apart from ob- obtaining a detailed
and fuller
taining picture and
a detailed of a fuller
complex problem,
picture Dornyeiproblem,
of a complex [38] maintained
Dornyei [38] thatmaintained
mixed-methods that
research could validate
mixed-methods researchthe findings
could validateby the
presenting
findingsthe research from
by presenting differentfrom
the research anglesdif-to
achieve the purpose
ferent angles to achieveof triangulation.
the purpose of triangulation.
The
Thequantitative
quantitative section
section of the research
research adopted
adoptedthe theexperimental
experimentaldesigndesign(see
(seeFigure
Figure1).1).
Randomly,
Randomly,69 69students
students werewere assigned
assigned to the control group group (N (N ==35)
35)and
andthe
theexperimental
experimental
group
group(N (N==34).
34).The
Thestudy
studylasted
lasted 1616
weeks.
weeks.Both
Bothgroups
groupsreceived
receivednon-flipped,
non-flipped, conventional
conven-
classroom instruction in the first 8 weeks. After that, the experimental
tional classroom instruction in the first 8 weeks. After that, the experimental group group received
re-
flipped instruction,
ceived flipped whereas
instruction, the control
whereas group group
the control continued the non-flipped
continued instruction
the non-flipped for
instruc-
another
tion for 8another
weeks.8 weeks.
In bothInclasses, the instructor
both classes, and the
the instructor andtextbook werewere
the textbook the same.
the same.The
teaching objective
The teaching of both
objective classes
of both was also
classes was the
alsosame, which
the same, was to
which wasenable learners
to enable to grasp
learners to
the gistthe
grasp and detail
gist and of various
detail listening
of various materials
listening and toand
materials use to
proper vocabulary
use proper and correct
vocabulary and
grammar to express
correct grammar themselves
to express in a communicative
themselves environment.
in a communicative environment.
Figure1.1. Experimental
Figure Experimental design.
design.
3.2.
3.2. Research
Research Context
Context and
and Participants
The
The research took
took place
placeinina apublic
public university
university in North
in North China.
China. The university’s
The university’s For-
Foreign Language Department provides college English courses
eign Language Department provides college English courses to first- and to first- andsecond-year
second-year
non-English
non-English major
major students. This study
students. This study focused
focused onon the
the College
College English
EnglishListening
Listeningand
and
Speaking
Speaking course.
course. In
In the study,
study, students
students met weekly for the 90-minute,
90-min, 16-week16-weekcourse in the
course in
autumn semester
the autumn of 2021.
semester A total
of 2021. of 69
A total of participants were
69 participants enrolled
were enrolledin in
thethe
College
CollegeEnglish
Eng-
Listening and Speaking
lish Listening and Speakingclass. None
class. of them
None hadhad
of them attended thethe
attended flipped
flipped classroom
classroombefore.
be-
Participants had studied
fore. Participants English
had studied for an
English foraverage of 14ofyears.
an average After
14 years. Afterreceiving
receivingpermission
permis-
from the department
sion from director,
the department 69 participants
director, werewere
69 participants randomly assigned
randomly assignedto two groups:
to two the
groups:
control group, which was taught by the non-flipped, conventional approach (N = 35) and
the experimental group (N = 34), which was taught by the flipped approach. The flipped
class intervention lasted 8 weeks.
3.3. Instruction Procedures

3.3.1. The e-Learning Platform
An e-learning platform called The Cloud Classroom was made available to both stu-
dents and teachers on mobile phones and computers. The teacher portal has functions such
as uploading videos and assignments, marking the submitted homework on the platform,
and providing feedback. Students could check the pre-class assignments, complete quizzes,
and submit homework through the student portal. The e-platform also generates records
about learner attendance, video viewing, and assignment completion.
3.3.2. The Non-Flipped Classroom

In the control group, the class was taught through the conventional non-flipped
method. The 90 min was divided into Phase A, Phase B, and Phase C. In Phase A, when the
class began, the teacher performed warm-up activities by asking students some questions
as the lead-in. Then, the teacher familiarised the students with new words and expressions.
After that, the teacher played the video or the tape twice. The listening exercises, such as
multiple-choice and blank-filling questions, followed. Meanwhile, the teacher circled the
classroom, checking on the answers and providing feedback if students had questions. In
Phase B, students watched a new video or listened to the audio recording as an extension of
Phase A topics. The listening materials were conversations. After watching or listening to
the materials twice, the students worked as a team to prepare for a mini-lecture based on the
topics. Then, the teacher selected a couple of students to deliver the mini-lecture in the front
of the classroom, after which the instructor gave some feedback. In Phase C, the teacher
played a new video for students to complete listening exercises. Standard answers and
explanations were then provided. Before the class finished, the teacher assigned homework.
The detailed course structure is shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Instructional process of the flipped and non-flipped classroom.
Non-Flipped Classroom Flipped Classroom

Before class
Before class • Students watch videos about the assignments.
• The instructor does not provide any videos.
• Students complete worksheets about the assignments.
During class During class
Phase A: 35 min Phase A: 10 min
• The instructor raises some questions about the topic as warm-up
activities and then teaches vocabulary. • The instructor checks students’ worksheets and provides feedback
• The instructor plays the first video twice and students finish the when necessary.
listening exercise. • The instructor plays the pre-class videos again and asks students
• The instructor answers the questions and elaborates if there are more questions about the video.
questions from students.
Phase B: 50 min
Phase B: 45 min • The instructor plays a new video twice and writes down the
• The instructor plays a new video twice and writes down the
general questions on the blackboard for students to discuss.
general questions on the blackboard for students to discuss.
• Students form a group of four to discuss the questions and write
• Students form a group of four to discuss the questions and write
down the main points on a piece of paper for a mini-lecture.
down the main points on a piece of paper for a mini-lecture.
• The instructor selects five groups to share their views in the class.
• The instructor selects five groups to share their views in the class.
• The instructor provides feedback.
Phase C: 30 min
• The instructor plays a new video/audio twice.
Phase C: 10 min • Students finish blank-filling or multiple-choice questions for a
• The instructor plays a new video/audio twice.
detailed listening exercise.
• Students finish blank-filling or multiple-choice questions for a
• Students work together to compare and discuss answers with each
detailed listening exercise.
other in the group.
• The instructor provides answers.
• The instructor checks on the responses and gives feedback if
students have questions.
After class After class
• Students review the lesson and complete listening and • Students review the lesson and complete listening and
speaking assignments. speaking assignments.
3.3.3. The Flipped Classroom

The flipped classroom consists of three phases: the pre-class phase, in-class phase,
and after-class phase. The classroom design followed the F-L-I-PTM model proposed in
Section 2.4. by Hung [9] (p. 188). According to the model, to create a flexible environment
in the flipped classroom, the course instructor uploaded pre-class videos and worksheets
to engage learners before the class; when preparing the materials, the instructor selected
the materials in line with the students’ present English proficiency to ensure that pre-class
assignments matched the learners’ proficiency level. The instructor encouraged students
to communicate before and after class through the e-learning platform to build a learning
culture. The instructor also designed different interactive activities and guided students to
collaborate and create a relaxing and friendly environment. In terms of intentional content,
the instructor made an effort to establish a close link between pre-class assignments, during-
class activities, and after-school assignments. The purpose of the pre-class assignment was
designed to scaffold learners by equipping them with linguistic knowledge and skills in
advance of in-class interactions. Regarding professional educators, the instructor holds a PhD
in language education and possesses many years of teaching experience.
Regarding the flipped instructional procedures, in the pre-class stage, the instructor
provided a video to introduce the topic relating to the class. Apart from making videos
himself, sometimes the instructor used the listening materials from the textbook and online
resources. The students were required to watch the videos at home and worked on the
worksheets on the e-learning platform (see Table 2).
In the in-class phase A, the instructor started the class by asking students some general
questions regarding the pre-class video to check understanding and then checked their
worksheets. Some feedback was provided if there were questions and problems. In Phase
B, the instructor played a new video/audio, wrote down the questions on the blackboard,
and let students form a group of four to discuss. After the discussion, the instructor
asked volunteers to represent their group to deliver a mini-lecture in English. After all
representatives finished the presentation, the teacher gave comments and feedback. In
Phase C, all the students were required to listen to a news recording twice and complete
the listening exercises. Then, they worked together to compare and discuss their answers.
The instructor provided sample answers after the teamwork and responded to learners’
inquiries. The final stage was to assign homework that required students to reflect on the
day’s learning and complete listening and speaking assignments. Students could post
questions on the e-learning platform for discussions and feedback.
3.4. Data Collection and Analysis

3.4.1. Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis
The quantitative data in this research came from participants’ self-report question-
naires administered to the control and experimental groups at the end of the 8th week
after both groups received the non-flipped, conventional instructions. The second round
of questionnaires was distributed to the control (non-flipped) and experimental (flipped)
group at the end of the 16th week, after the experimental group received the flipped instruc-
tion while the control group continued with non-flipped instruction. After collecting data
from pre-questionnaires and post-questionnaires, the mean of the four engagement scales
was calculated and analysed. We used independent sample t-tests to compare the control
group (non-flipped) and the experimental group (flipped) before and after the intervention.
Meanwhile, we applied paired sample t-tests to compare the results of the flipped group
before and after the intervention, as well as the results of the non-flipped class before and
after the 8-week traditional teaching. In the questionnaires, the behavioural, emotional, and
cognitive engagement items were adapted from Hiver et al. [28], and the social engagement
items were adapted from Wang et al. [27]. The five-point Likert scale questionnaires (see
Appendix A) were translated from English to Chinese. Two language education professors
were invited to check on questionnaire content and translations for content validity. Then,
researchers revised the questionnaires based on the feedback. Before formally administer-
ing questionnaires, we performed a piloting study on 15 students from a similar EFL class
in the university to ensure the words and items in the questionnaires were clear and did
not incur misunderstanding, ambiguity, and discomfort for the participants. Participants
were required to rate the items based on their true feelings about the course by circling one
of the options, ranging from never true of me (1) to always true of me (5). After formally
administering the questionnaires, Cronbach’s alpha of the engagement sub-scales was
calculated: behavioural engagement (8 items, a = 0.802), emotional engagement (11 items,
a = 0.857), cognitive engagement (8 items, a = 0.844), and social engagement (5 items,

a = 0.979). The Cronbach’s alpha results indicate that the reliability of engagement ques-
tionnaires is above the acceptable level [39] (p. 774).
3.4.2. Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

Qualitative data came from semi-structured interviews to answer the second research
question: “what factors affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom?” In
addition, the qualitative data were also used to verify, compare, and contrast with the
quantitative data. After quantitative data analysis, six participants were selected using
purposeful sampling based on voluntary participation. In the experimental group, three
participants with the highest overall score and three with the lowest overall score in the
post-questionnaires were chosen. Four were male and two were female. They were referred
to as S1–S6 in the study. The reason for this selection was to understand different learners’
experience in the flipped class. Questions such as “what was something specific that you
enjoyed about this learning experience?”, “what were some specific concerns or difficulties
you had during this learning experience?”, and “did you observe any changes in yourself
or others regarding attitudes, behaviours, emotions and relationships with others in the
flipped learning?” were asked (see Appendix B for detailed interview questions).
The interview site was the university classroom, which provided a familiar and non-
threatening environment where the interviewees could relax and talk more about what they
genuinely felt and thought [38]. The interviews were conducted in Chinese, the participants’
L1. The interviews were audio-recorded after gaining permission from the participants, and
then the recording was transcribed verbatim. One researcher rendered the transcripts from
Chinese into English before the translation was further checked by the other researcher.
After translation, we started the coding process following three steps: first, we looked at
the data and gained a general understanding of the texts; then, we grouped the data into
broader categories; and finally, the categories were integrated into broader themes [38].
4. Findings
This study adopted questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to investigate the
effects of the flipped EFL class on learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social
engagement through the experiment. Data from semi-structured interviews were also
compared with quantitative results. In addition, interview data enabled researchers to
explore the factors affecting learners’ engagement in the flipped EFL class. The findings of
this study are organised following the research questions.
4.1. RQ1: Does the Flipped Classroom Lead to a Significant Improvement in Learners’ Behavioural,
Emotional, Cognitive and Social Engagement Compared to the Non-Flipped Classroom?
Before we started the flipped class treatment process, it was essential to ensure that
the experimental and control groups did not have statistically significant differences in
behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement. To check whether the differ-
ence existed, we administered the first round of engagement questionnaires after the two
groups received 8-week non-flipped instructions and before the flipped instruction started.
We used an independent sample t-test in SPSS 26.0 to analyse the mean score of each
engagement scale (see Table 3).
Table 3. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class pre-test results.
Engagement Class N Mean SD t p

Flipped 34 3.8218 0.73458
Behavioural
1.040 0.302
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.6191 0.87507
Flipped 34 3.5218 0.77962
Emotional
0.858 0.394
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.3717 0.67134
Flipped 34 3.3441 0.73448
Cognitive
0.973 0.334
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.1586 0.73448
Flipped 34 3.8335 0.87084
Social
−0.280 0.781
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.8914 0.84762
p > 0.05.
The analysis results showed that the difference in behavioural, emotional, cognitive,
and social engagement between the flipped and the non-flipped class was 0.302, 0.394,
0.334, and 0.781, respectively (p > 0.05), indicating that there is not a statistically significant
difference between the flipped and the non-flipped class in the four engagement dimensions.
The results were expected because the participants were randomly assigned into two groups,
and all the participants were considered pre-intermediate by the school administration.
The same questionnaires were administered after the 8-week treatment, during which
time the flipped model instructed the experimental group while the control group was
still taught through the non-flipped approach. After checking normal distribution and
homogeneity of the collected data, we applied a paired-sample t-test to compare the flipped
class’s pre-test and post-test scores (see Table 4); we used an independent sample t-test to
compare the post-test results of the flipped and the non-flipped class (see Table 5), and the
non-flipped class’s pre-test and post-test scores (see Table 6).
Table 4. Comparison of the flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.
Engagement Flipped Class N Mean SD t p

Pre-test 34 3.8218 0.73458
Behavioural
5.769 0.000 *
engagement
Post-test 34 4.1168 0.62553
Pre-test 34 3.5218 0.77962
Emotional
4.641 0.000 *
engagement
Post-test 34 3.6841 0.68345
Pre-test 34 3.3441 0.84745
Cognitive
6.093 0.000 *
engagement
Post-test 34 3.5941 0.74141
Pre-test 34 3.8335 0.87084
Social
4.168 0.000 *
engagement
Post-test 34 4.1862 0.53537
* p < 0.05.
Table 5. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class post-test results.
Engagement Class N Mean SD t p

Flipped 34 4.1168 0.62553
Behavioural
2.518 0.014 *
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.6991 0.74524
Flipped 34 3.6841 0.68345
Emotional
1.673 0.099
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.4183 0.63593
Flipped 34 3.3441 0.73448
Cognitive
2.346 0.022 *
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.1586 0.73448
Flipped 34 3.8335 0.87084
Social
2.165 0.034 *
engagement
Non-flipped 35 3.8914 0.84762
* p < 0.05.
Table 6. Comparison of the non-flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.
Engagement Non-Flipped N Mean SD t p

Pre-test 35 3.6191 0.87507
Behavioural
1.628 0.230
engagement
Post-test 35 3.6991 0.74524
Pre-test 35 3.3717 0.67134
Emotional
2.030 0.050
engagement
Post-test 35 3.4183 0.63593
Pre-test 35 3.1586 0.73448
Cognitive
1.558 0.128
engagement
Post-test 35 3.1957 0.66829
Pre-test 35 3.8914 0.84762
Social
−1.222 0.230
engagement
Post-test 34 3.8400 0.77429
p > 0.05.
Comparing the flipped-class pre-tests and post-tests (see Table 4) indicated that the
mean score of the post-test questionnaires in all four engagement dimensions was higher
than that in the pre-tests, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Specifi-
cally, the mean score of behavioural engagement in the post-test (M = 4.1168) was higher
than that in the pre-test (M = 3.8218). The mean score of emotional engagement (M = 3.6841),
cognitive engagement (M = 3.5941), and social engagement (M = 4.1862) was also higher
than that in the pre-test (M = 3.5218, 3.3441, 3.8335, respectively) (p < 0.05). The difference
was statistically significant.
Comparing the post-test questionnaires in the flipped and the non-flipped class (see
Table 5) revealed that in the flipped class, the mean score of the post-test questionnaires
in terms of behavioural engagement (M = 4.1168) was higher than the non-flipped class
(M = 3.6991) (p < 0.05). Similarly, in cognitive engagement and social engagement, the
mean score of the post-test in the flipped class (M = 3.3441, 3.8335) was significantly
higher than that in the non-flipped group (M = 3.1586, 3.8914) (p < 0.05). However, it
is noteworthy that in the flipped class, although the mean post-test score in emotional
engagement (M = 3.6841) was higher than that in the non-flipped group (M = 3.4183), the
difference was not statistically significant.
We also compared the mean score of pre-tests and post-tests (see Table 6) in the
non-flipped class. Analysis revealed that the mean score of behavioural, emotional, and
cognitive engagement in the post-tests was higher than in the pre-tests. However, the
difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). We were also surprised to find that the
mean score of the post-test questionnaires in the non-flipped class was lower than that in
the pre-tests in terms of social engagement.
Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews also support quantitative findings.
Participants in the interviews responded that they spent more time and effort when in-
structed by the flipped model. This is because they had to preview the materials before
class for participation in the classroom. For example, S2 commented that if he did not
watch the videos beforehand, he would not be able to participate in and contribute to
team-based tasks in the class, making him embarrassed. In addition, S5 mentioned he
became more emotionally and socially involved in the flipped classroom due to increased
opportunities to interact with peers and the instructor inside and outside the classroom. S2
commented: “Talking with my classmates in the classroom made me know them better,
and they also provided much support when I met problems in my study”. It is clear
that students supporting each other in the learning process in the flipped class helped
form a sense of belonging and trust. The immediate feedback from the instructor, as S1
said, helped her to understand language mistakes better, thus improving emotional and
cognitive engagement.
Based on the quantitative and qualitative findings, the answer to the first research
question is that the flipped EFL classroom can significantly improve learners’ behavioural,
emotional, cognitive, and social engagement. Comparing the flipped and the non-flipped
class, we found that learners performed better in all four engagement dimensions. However,
it should be noted that the difference in emotional engagement in the post-questionnaires
between the flipped and the non-flipped class is not statistically significant.
4.2. RQ2: What Factors Affect Learners’ Engagement in the Flipped EFL Class?
After quantitative data analysis, six participants in the flipped class were selected
for the semi-structured interviews based on their overall scores in the second round of
engagement questionnaires (S1–S3 were ranked in the top three in terms of total scores,
and S4–S6 at the bottom). Interview data analysis generated a number of themes relating to
the factors that impact learners’ engagement in the flipped classroom. The themes were
categorised into positive and negative factors.
4.2.1. Positive Factors

Interview data show that learning environment, learning culture, instructor presence,
and learner presence positively affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL class.
Learning Environment
All of the interview participants appreciated the flexible and interactive learning
environment in the flipped classroom. They spoke highly of the flexible learning space
created inside and outside the flipped classroom, offline and online. They also preferred
interactive and collaborative learning tasks in the flipped context. When asked to provide
an example of flexible and interactive-based learning, students responded:
I liked the fact that my English learning was no longer just taking place in the physical
classroom. Accessing the videos online increased my exposure to English, and I was fond
of learning English on my smartphone. Well, it was so convenient. (S1)
In the flipped class, the Cloud Classroom (e-learning platform) allowed me to study the
materials at my own pace when my time was available, as long as I finished the task before
class. (S3)
Inside the classroom, I was no longer shy about speaking English because my classmates
were also using English in the group tasks, and it had become standard practice. (S5)
I was just a passive listener in the previous (non-flipped) class, and sometimes I fell asleep
while the instructor played the listening materials. Now, I found sleep was impossible
because I was required to be more active in group discussions and take quizzes and play
games in class. (S6)
The interviews show that the desirability of flipped instruction lies in the fact that
learners feel they have more flexibility and choices regarding where and when to learn,
which also leads to more exposure to the language. They had more control over their learn-
ing. The collaborative and interactive learning environment also lowered their anxiety and
nervousness when using English, thus contributing to the increase of learner engagement
in the language study.
Instructor Presence
Participants’ responses revealed that although the flipped classroom demands learner
autonomy and learner-centeredness, it did not diminish the teacher’s role. Instead, the
instructor needed to assume a more critical role as leader, manager, and facilitator. This
increased share of responsibility was reflected by the fact that the participants said that they
raised more questions in and outside the classroom and needed more help and feedback
from the teacher.
When I encountered some problems in group discussions, I usually asked the teacher
when she circled. (S3)
The teacher gave me instant feedback when I did not know how to express myself in English
during classroom discussions. He approached me quickly and gave me instructions. (S1)
I once met a problem in the pre-class stage and couldn’t watch the video. So, I sent a
message to the teacher on WeChat, and she instructed me to sort out the problem. I really
appreciated her time and effort. (S4)
The responses from the interviewees demonstrated that in the flipped classroom,
students needed more assistance from the teacher and appreciated the instructor’s presence.
The flipped classroom had created opportunities for more student-teacher communication
and closer rapport. The instructor acted as a leader, manager, and facilitator throughout
the flipped learning process.
Learning Content
In the flipped EFL classroom, the instructor needs to provide intentional learning
content imparting both meanings and forms of the language. In addition, the pre-class
materials are based on learners’ proficiency to carefully scaffold them for interactive-
based learning activities during the class [9]. Learning content should come from various
resources and appeal to learners. Responses from the participants suggested an affection
for the alignment of pre-class assignments and in-class tasks, as well as an appreciation for
interesting learning content:
In the non-flipped class, one of the difficulties of speaking English during the class was
that I did not know the vocabulary and grammar to construct a single sentence. But
the flipped class helped me gain linguistic knowledge before the class to become more
competent in group discussions in the class. (S3)
After watching the videos, I knew what I would learn in the next class, which prepared
me for classroom tasks, so I was less nervous than before. (S5)
The videos provided by the instructor are funnier than the textbook and it made my
learning different and interesting. (S2)
Learner Presence
The flipped classroom is demanding and requires learners to spend more time and
energy on pre-class assignments and classroom activities. It also needs learners to become
active participants in the learning process and take responsibility for their own learning.
Interviews revealed that the interactive nature of the flipped instruction initially posed
some challenges for Chinese EFL learners, who were generally perceived as shy and
refrained from voicing their opinions in public. However, the learners proved relatively
resilient and quickly adapted to the new learning approach after they became familiar with
flipped learning under careful support. For example, S5 commented that he previously
refused to answer questions in class because he was worried about losing “face” in front
of his classmates. However, two weeks later, he gradually adapted to flipped learning
after he realised that everybody could not run away from expressing their opinions in the
classroom. “If you didn’t respond to the teacher’s question, you would disgrace the whole
team”, added S5. In sum, flipped instruction pushed learners to become more active and
engaged with their learning.
4.2.2. Negative Factors

Although interviews indicated that the flipped classroom created favourable condi-
tions for learners to engage more with their learning process, some participants expressed
their concerns when asked what difficulties or problems they had in the flipped classroom.
Data analysis showed that the problems ranged from an excessive workload, a lack of
preparedness, lengthy videos, and technical challenges, such as video quality and poor
Internet connection.
For example, in the interview, S5 replied: “I need to spend some time to finish watching
the videos and completing the worksheet, which added to my study pressure because I had
to finish other schoolwork at the same time.” The reply indicates that flipped instruction
required students to balance conflicting learning tasks, placed demands on learners’ time
management, and added to the workload of learners.
The interview with S6 also revealed that learners need extra time and support to help
them adjust to the new learning normal, which might be challenging when learners have
become accustomed to doing little preparation before the English class. S6 commented:
Previously, I thought learning English was all about carrying the textbook to the classroom
and doing listening exercises. Now, the thing is kind of different because I am required
to watch the videos on my own before the class. Frankly speaking, sometimes I couldn’t
finish all the pre-class assignments.
S60 s concerns were shared by S4, who admitted that sometimes it was difficult to
complete all the pre-class assignments because he was “too busy with other subjects”,
“English is simply not my major”, and “I wondered whether it was worth it if I spend too
much time on English”. This shows that learners encountered some uncertainty about
whether or not they should prioritize flipped EFL assignments over other courses when
they were required to commit more time to flipped learning.
The “lengthy videos” were another factor that exacerbated the problem, as S5 re-
sponded that some videos, especially those from TED Talks and YouTube, were more than
“10 min long” and he had to “spend a lot of time” figuring out what the speakers mean
in the lectures. In addition, S3 said that she only had a smartphone with a small screen,
making her learning “less engaging” and “more difficult”. She wished to have a computer
to access learning materials apart from a smartphone. In the interview, the participant
complained that she understood the instructor committed himself to the course, and she
appreciated the teacher’s effort. However, she found that in some videos, “the sound is not
clear and pictures not sharp,” and sometimes, the Internet did not work, and she would
lose her patience with the assignments.
Overall, despite generally positive responses from learners in the flipped instruction,
interviews with the participants also exposed several drawbacks. These negative factors
ranged from internal factors relating to individual learners to external influences associated
with technology and video content. To make the flipped classroom successful, instructors
must alleviate or overcome these obstacles in designing, developing, and implementing
the flipped instruction.
5. Discussion and Conclusions

This study was carried out in the context of a Chinese university to investigate whether
flipped instruction could lead to a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural, emo-
tional, cognitive, and social engagement in the College English Listening and Speaking
course and what factors affect learners’ engagement in the flipped course.
One central finding was that after the 8-week flipped instruction, students in the
flipped classroom had higher behavioural, emotional, and social engagement levels. One
possible reason is that the flipped class had created a favourable and facilitative learning
environment for students to be involved and participate in the pre- and in-class activities
actively [4,13,29]. The substantial increase in interactions between peers and with the
instructor in the physical classroom and online environment via the Cloud Classroom led
to closer student-teacher rapport and higher learner motivation, which may explain the
increased engagement levels, as the interview data suggested that students communicated
with the teacher and asked questions in the pre- and during-class phase and became more
willing to communicate with peers. Kahu [23] claimed that the change in learners’ engage-
ment in the academic context was subject to the influence of the learning environment
co-constructed by learners, the instructor, the university staff, and other contextual ele-
ments. Accordingly, the enhancement in learners’ engagement may result from various
interconnected factors mutually reinforcing one another, and the flipped classroom may
have combined these elements to the advantage of learners. For example, in the interview,
one participant said that the flipped classroom had facilitated him to finish the pre- and
in-class tasks because he did not want to bring humiliation to the whole team once he
failed to participate. In other words, the flipped classroom had fostered a strong sense of
belonging and learning in a community where individuals actively relate to each other,
resulting in improved engagement in behavioural, emotional, and social dimensions.
Furthermore, in terms of cognitive engagement, the flipped classroom encouraged
learners to learn at their own pace by giving them flexibility and freedom to choose
when, where, and what to learn. The application of the e-learning platform—the Cloud
Classroom—provided an interactive, stimulating, and seamless learning environment, as
learners could use the platform to access videos, receive feedback from the lecturer, and
familiarize themselves with the course materials in preparation for in-class discussions.
This activated and facilitated the development of learners’ autonomy, problem-solving,
decision-making, and critical-thinking skills [3], contributing to the development of cog-
nitive engagement. This finding was congruent with previous studies conducted by
Amiryousefi [3], Hung [4], and Lee and Wallace [14]. Their research found that EFL learners
had more engagement with course content and class activities, and invested more time
and effort in the flipped learning process. However, these researchers primarily focused
on the behavioural aspect of engagement and did not provide a detailed and multidimen-
sional account of engagement. The results of the present research, by contrast, emphasised
behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social dimensions, thus contributing to a more
comprehensive understanding of learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom. The
findings have pedagogical implications: language professionals in the flipped context
could gain more comprehensive knowledge about their learners’ engagement and thus take
corresponding measures to promote and sustain engagement from the four dimensions.
They need to pay more attention to the engagement dimensions that may be ignored.
Not all the results in this study were positive. One surprising finding of this research
was that although the treatment group (the flipped class) had a significant increase in all
engagement dimensions in the post-questionnaire compared with the pre-questionnaire
results, there was no significant difference in emotional engagement when comparing the
flipped and non-flipped post-questionnaire results. One possible reason is that emotional
engagement concerns the mental state of learners, such as confidence, anxiety, interest, and
enthusiasm, which were affected not only by teaching pedagogies but also by learners’
existing personal characteristics and previous educational and cultural backgrounds [40].
This means that emotional engagement may not experience salient changes by intervention
in the short term, say 8 weeks. Another possible explanation is that some learners need
time to be mentally ready for this novel teaching approach. Interview data also support
this hypothesis. Semi-structured interviews suggested that students’ workload and lack of
preparedness were two negative factors affecting learner engagement, which may cause
emotional constraints if students in the flipped classroom cannot cope with the difficulties
they encounter. Previous research by Hsieh, Wu, and Marek [41] also echoed this discovery.
The authors argued that the success of the flipped classroom depended on learners’ prepa-
ration and willingness to participate in the activities. This implies that teachers should
be aware of learners’ emotional needs in the flipped classroom and pay special attention
to their emotional changes. To reduce learners’ workload, teaching professionals and
researchers in the future need to investigate learners’ acceptance of pre-class video length
in their learning context to make it consistent with learners’ English proficiency. Moreover,
instructors must provide guidance, patience, rewards, and care to involve all learners
throughout the flipped learning process. Therefore, in future research, it is worthwhile
to find appropriate strategies to diffuse learners’ concerns and help them overcome the
challenges in flipped learning to optimise learner engagement.
Finally, it should be noted that the flipped EFL classroom in this study was designed by
following the F-L-I-PTM model and carried out on the free e-learning platform, the Cloud
Classroom, which has a diversity of functions ranging from the discussion board, voice
recordings, scores awarded to learners, instant translation, learners’ performance ranking,
and gamified learning activities. The easy affordance of the e-learning platform might
explain why learners had favourable attitudes towards the flipped learning experience,
given that if learners encounter this learning and teaching approach for the first time, they
would be naturally attracted to the novelty. In addition, the F-L-I-PTM model, though
designed as a guiding principle for the flipped instruction [9], could also help promote
the effectiveness of other learning and teaching approaches because the model requires
the instructors to have professional knowledge, skills, and conscientious attitudes towards
the course and instructional approach. Thus, it can be argued that the flipped instruction,
coupled with professional instructors, modern technologies, and relatively cooperative
learners, may lead to strong learner engagement and positive learner perceptions. Therefore,
the complexity of the flipped classroom should be well noted, and future practitioners and
researchers should pay attention to the positive and negative factors when developing and
designing their own flipped EFL courses.
Overall, this study expanded existing knowledge about the correlation between the
flipped EFL classroom and learner engagement by looking at engagement from multidi-
mensional perspectives. It contributes evidence to the existing literature by proving that
the flipped classroom has pedagogical potential to enhance learners’ behavioural, cognitive,
and social engagement in a listening and speaking class in the context of a Chinese univer-
sity. However, we were cautious about the effect of the flipped classroom on the emotional
aspect of engagement because no significant difference was discovered between the flipped
and the non-flipped class after the 8-week treatment. This implies that more care and effort
are needed to cater to learners’ emotional needs in the flipped learning environment and
more research is needed to examine emotional engagement. We also found that learners’
lack of preparedness, workload, and technical challenges may hinder the sustainable de-
velopment of engagement, whereas the flexible learning environment, instructor presence,
intentional content, and learner presence could jointly promote learners’ engagement.
For the successful implementation of flipped instruction, it is recommended that
teaching professionals and researchers be aware of the contextual complexity of flipped
classrooms and consider learner factors and other constraints. In addition, instructors
need to develop digital expertise to provide immediate feedback, adequate guidance,
and strong support throughout the flipped instruction and to build inter-connectivity
between pre-class materials and in-class tasks, based on the F-L-I-PTM model. Moreover, to
reduce learners’ workload, sufficient time should be given to learners in the pre-class phase,
whereas learning strategies and time-management training should be provided to maximise
learners’ time use. Further, implementing successful flipped classrooms requires active
and continued administrative support and close cooperation between instructors, school
administrators, parents, and other stakeholders to address technical and other problems
that may arise in the learning process. Finally, teaching professionals and researchers
interested in flipped instruction need to be aware of the complex contextual factors in this
study. It is dangerous to assume that flipped teaching will inevitably bring about strong
learner engagement and positive learning outcomes in all learning and teaching contexts
by simply giving learners some videos to watch in advance. In other words, the flipped
classroom success is not only about reversing traditional learning and teaching procedures
but about becoming the instructor who attends to learners’ needs and who aspires to use
the modern technology for effective classroom learning and teaching.
The study also has some limitations. To begin with, the flipped instruction only lasted
8 weeks, which was not enough to determine the long-term effect on learners’ engagement.
It might also explain why there was no significant difference in emotional engagement
between the flipped and non-flipped classrooms. Future studies can extend the flipped
instruction, say to one year, to look at the long-term impact of the flipped EFL classroom on
learner engagement, especially emotional engagement. Moreover, the flipped instruction
took place in a listening and speaking class in the context of a Chinese university by
studying and comparing around 35 students in two classes. The sample size is small. Thus,
the generalizability of the research findings should be performed with caution, and future
researchers should be aware of confounding variables such as the instructor’s teaching
ability, individual learners’ English proficiency, and learners’ educational and sociocultural
backgrounds. Thus, more studies should be conducted in other teaching and learning
contexts to verify the flipped classroom’s effectiveness on learner engagement. Finally,
this research only applied t-tests to deal with the data. Future researchers can use more
robust statistical models, such as mixed-effects models that consider within-participant and
within-item variance, to investigate the effects of confounding variables, such as students’
English proficiency levels and teacher training and experience. Despite the limitations
aforementioned, the study’s findings could still assist language teachers and researchers to
better understand flipped instruction in the EFL classrooms.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.L. and J.L.; methodology, Z.L.; software, J.L.; valida-
tion, J.L.; formal analysis, Z.L. and J.L.; investigation, Z.L.; writing—original draft preparation,
Z.L.; writing—review and editing, J.L.; visualization, Z.L. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due
to the study being carried out with the consent of learners aged over 18 years old and that the study
did not incur any potential harm to participants.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A. Engagement Questionnaires

The following section aims to understand your engagement in the English Listening
and Speaking Class. Please circle the answer that best expresses how true the statement is
about your feelings or situation. Please circle only one number from 1 to 5. Please do not
leave out any of the items. Thank you.
下面的问卷旨在了解你在听说课上的融入情况. 请圈出最能反映你个人的感受或情况
的陈述, 仅需圈出1–5中的一个数字, 请完成全部条目. 谢谢.
Never True of Me Sometimes True of Me True of Me Half the Time Frequently True of Me Always True of Me
从不符合我的情况有时符合我的情况一半符合我的情况经常符合我的情况总是符合我的情况
1 2 3 4 5
1. When I did not understand in the English language class during this semester, I would stay focused until I
1 2 3 4 5
did. 在本学期的英语课上, 当我不理解的时候, 会专心致志, 直至理解.
2. I put effort into learning in this English language class. 在英语课上我努力学习. 1 2 3 4 5
3. During this semester, I kept trying in my English language class even if something was hard. 本学期的英
1 2 3 4 5
语课上, 遇到困难, 我会不断尝试.
4. I completed my English homework on time. 我按时完成英语作业. 1 2 3 4 5
5. I thought and talked about English learning outside of the class this term. 我在课外思考并谈论英语学习. 1 2 3 4 5
6. I didn’t participate much in my English language class. 我在英语课上参与度不高. 1 2 3 4 5
7. When I was in my English language class, I paid attention and listened carefully. 在英语课上, 我注意力集
1 2 3 4 5
中, 听课认真.
8. I did other things in the English language classroom when I was supposed to be paying attention. 在英语
1 2 3 4 5
课上, 我在应该集中注意力的时候做其它事情.
9. I looked forward to my English language class. 我很期待英语课. 1 2 3 4 5
10. I enjoyed learning new things about languages in class. 在课上我喜欢学习语言相关的新知识. 1 2 3 4 5
11. I wanted to understand what I was learning in my English language class. 我想理解在英语课上学到的东
1 2 3 4 5
西.
12. I often felt frustrated in my English language class. 英语课上, 我经常有挫败感. 1 2 3 4 5
13. I felt good when I was in my English language class. 在英语课上我感到愉悦. 1 2 3 4 5
14. I didn’t care about learning English. 我不在乎英语学习. 1 2 3 4 5
15. I was willing to communicate in English in the English class. 我愿意在英语课上用英语交流. 1 2 3 4 5
16. I didn’t want to be in my English language class. 我不想上英语课. 1 2 3 4 5
17. The English class during this semester helped me to be more confident in English. 本学期的英语课程使我
1 2 3 4 5
对英语学习更有自信.
Never True of Me Sometimes True of Me True of Me Half the Time Frequently True of Me Always True of Me
从不符合我的情况有时符合我的情况一半符合我的情况经常符合我的情况总是符合我的情况
1 2 3 4 5
1. I think that the English language class was boring. 我认为英语课无聊. 1 2 3 4 5
2. I look forward to having more English courses of this kind. 我期待未来能上更多此种类型的英语课. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I went through the work for my English language class carefully and made sure that it was done right. 我
1 2 3 4 5
认真准备英语相关的作业, 确保作业的质量.
4. I would rather be told the answer than have to do the work. 我希望被直接告知答案, 而不是自己解答. 1 2 3 4 5
5. In my English language class, I thought about different ways to solve a problem. 在英语课上, 我尝试使用
1 2 3 4 5
不同的方法去解决问题.
6. I tried to connect what I am learning in the English language classroom to things I have learned before. 我
1 2 3 4 5
尝试将英语课学到的知识与之前的知识联系起来.
7. I didn’t think that hard when I was doing work for my English language class. 在做英语作业时, 我不会努
1 2 3 4 5
力思考.
8. I tried to understand my mistakes in the English language classroom when I got something wrong. 在英语
1 2 3 4 5
课上, 当我犯错误的时候, 我会弄清楚错误的原因.
9. When work in my English language class got hard, I only studied the easy parts. 当英语作业变难的时候,
1 2 3 4 5
我只学习简单的部分.
10. I did just enough to get by in the English language classroom. 在英语课上, 我只为完成考试而努力. 1 2 3 4 5
11. I would help my peers when they were struggling in the English course. 当我的同学在英语课上遇到困难
1 2 3 4 5
时, 我会帮助他们.
12. I enjoyed working with peers in the English course. 在英语课程中, 我喜欢与同伴合作. 1 2 3 4 5
13. In the English course, I was willing to work with other students, and we could learn from each other. 在英
1 2 3 4 5
语课上, 我愿意跟其他学生一起学习, 相互借鉴.
14. In the English course, I was open to making new friends. 我愿意在课程学习中结交新的朋友. 1 2 3 4 5
15. In the English course, I enjoyed spending time learning with peers in the class. 我喜欢在英语课程学习中
1 2 3 4 5
花更多时间与同伴一起学习.
The following section is basic information about you. We need the information to
interpret your answers properly. The answers are anonymous and confidential, and will
not be disclosed to other people.
下面的问卷内容主要是关于你的个人情况. 我们需要这些信息去更好地理解你的回答.
你的答案是匿名和保密的, 不会公开给其他人.
What is your gender? (Please put a tick in the box) Male Female
你的性别是?(请填写对勾) 男性女性
How old are you (in years)? .............
你的年龄是?(请填写整年) ..............
How many years have you been learning English? ................
你已经学习了多少年英语?..................
Are there any other comments you would like to make, either in relation to your 2021
fall semester English Listening and Speaking Class or this questionnaire?
对于2021年秋季学期英语听说课程或本问卷, 你是否还有其它评论?
.....................................................................................................................................................
Appendix B. Part of Interview Questions

1. What was something specific that you enjoyed about this learning experience? Can
you give examples? 在这次学习经历中, 你喜欢哪些地方?你能具体举例说明吗?
2. What were some specific concerns or difficulties you had during this learning experi-
ence? Can you provide examples? 在这次学习过程中, 你遇到了哪些具体的问题或困
难?能举例说明吗?
3. Did you observe any changes in yourself or others regarding attitudes, behaviours,
emotions, and relationships with others in the flipped learning? What are some
specific examples? 在翻转学习中, 你有没有观察到自己或他人在态度, 行为, 情绪和与
他人的关系方面有任何变化?有哪些具体的例子?
4. Are you going to recommend flipped classrooms to other people? Why or why not?
你会向其他人推荐翻转课堂吗?为什么或为什么不?
5. If you take a flipped class in your future college English studies, what improvement
is necessary and what support would you like to get? 如果你在未来的大学英语学习
使用翻转课堂, 课堂需要哪些改进,你希望得到什么支持?
6. Do you have other things to add? 你还有其它要补充的吗?
References
1. Mercer, S.; Dörnyei, Z. Engaging Language Learners in Contemporary Classrooms; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2020;
pp. 1–6.
2. Li, Z.Y. Book Review: Engaging Language Learners in Contemporary Classrooms by Mercer S and Dörnyei Z. RELC J. 2021.
online first publication. [CrossRef]
3. Amiryousefi, M. The incorporation of flipped learning into conventional classes to enhance EFL learners’ L2 speaking, L2
listening, and engagement. Innov. Lang. Learn. Teach. 2019, 13, 147–161. [CrossRef]
4. Hung, H.-T. Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2015, 28,
81–96. [CrossRef]
5. Lawson, M.A.; Lawson, H.A. New Conceptual Frameworks for Student Engagement Research, Policy, and Practice. Rev. Educ.
Res. 2013, 83, 432–479. [CrossRef]
6. Fredricks, J.A.; Blumenfeld, P.; Paris, A. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev. Educ. Res. 2004,
74, 59–109. [CrossRef]
7. Zhou, S.Y.; Hiver, P.; AI-Hoorie, A.H. Measuring L2 Engagement: A Review of Issues and Applications. In Student Engagement in
the Language Classroom; Hiver, P., AI-Hoorie, A.H., Mercer, S., Eds.; Multilingual Matters: Bristol, UK, 2021; pp. 75–98.
8. Bergmann, J.; Sams, A. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day; International Society for Technology in
Education: Eugene, OR, USA, 2012.
9. Hung, H.-T. Design-Based Research: Redesign of an English Language Course Using a Flipped Classroom Approach. TESOL Q.
2017, 51, 180–192. [CrossRef]
10. Lin, C.J.; Hwang, G.J. A Learning Analytics Approach to Investigating Factors Affecting EFL Students’ Oral Performance in a
Flipped Classroom. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2018, 21, 205–219.
11. Challob, A.I. The effect of flipped learning on EFL students’ writing performance, autonomy, and motivation. Educ. Inf. Technol.
2021, 26, 3743–3769. [CrossRef]
12. Chen, M.A.; Hwang, G. Effects of a concept mapping-based flipped learning approach on EFL students’ English-speaking
performance, critical thinking awareness and speaking anxiety. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2020, 51, 817–834. [CrossRef]
13. Tran, Q.T.T.; Nguyen, L.V. EFL Student Engagement in an English for Specific Purposes Tourism Class: Flipped the Class with
Facebook. In Technology and the Psychology of Second Language Learners and Users; Freiermuth, M.R., Zarrinabadi, N., Eds.; The
Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 175–202.
14. Lee, G.; Wallace, A. Flipped learning in English as a foreign language classroom: Outcomes and Perceptions. TESOL Q. 2017, 52,
62–84. [CrossRef]
15. Lage, M.J.; Platt, G. The internet and the inverted classroom. J. Econ. Educ. 2000, 31, 11–12. [CrossRef]
16. Novak, G.M. Just-in-time teaching. New Dir. Teach. Learn. 2011, 128, 63–73. [CrossRef]
17. Bishop, J.L.; Verleger, M.A. The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research. In Proceedings of the 120th American Society for
Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, 23–26 June 2013; Volume 30, pp. 1–18.
18. Bond, M. Facilitating Student Engagement through the Flipped Learning Approach in K-12: A Systematic Review. Comput. Educ.
2020, 151, 103819. [CrossRef]
19. Skinner, E.A.; Kindermann, T.A.; Furrer, C. A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualisation and
assessment of children’s behavioural and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educ. Psychol. Meas.
2009, 69, 493–525. [CrossRef]
20. Bygate, M.; Samuda, V. Creating pressure in task pedagogy: The joint roles of field, purpose, and engagement within the
interaction approaches. In Multiple Perspectives on Interaction: Second Language Research; Mackey, A., Polio, C., Eds.; Routledge:
New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 90–116.
21. Finn, J. Withdrawing from School. Rev. Educ. Res. 1989, 59, 117–142. [CrossRef]
22. Axelson, R.D.; Flick, A. Defining Student Engagement. Change Mag. High. Learn. 2010, 43, 38–43. [CrossRef]
23. Kahu, E.R. Framing student engagement in higher education. Stud. High. Educ. 2013, 38, 758–773. [CrossRef]
24. Linnenbrink-Garcia, L.; Rogat, T.; Koskey, K. Affect and engagement during small group instruction. Contemp. Educ. Psychol.
2011, 36, 13–24. [CrossRef]
25. Mercer, S. Language learner engagement: Setting the scene. In Second Handbook of English Language Teaching; Gao, X., Ed.; Springer:
New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 1–19.
26. Svalberg, A.M.-L. Researching language engagement: Current trends, and future directions. Lang. Aware. 2017, 27, 21–39.
[CrossRef]
27. Wang, M.; Fredricks, J.; Ye, F.; Hofkens, T.; Linn, J. Conceptualisation and Assessment of Adolescents’ Engagement and
Disengagement in School. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2019, 35, 592–606. [CrossRef]
28. Hiver, P.; Zhou, S.; Tahmouresi, S.; Sang, Y.; Papi, M. Why stories matter: Exploring learner engagement and metacognition
through narratives of the L2 learning experience. System 2020, 91, 102260. [CrossRef]
29. Norazmi, D.; Dwee, C.Y.; Suzilla, J.; Nurzarina, A.S. Exploring Student Engagement in Writing using the Flipped Classroom
Approach. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. Hum. 2017, 25, 663–674.
30. Jiao, L.X.; Ren, C.L.; Lv, C.J. Feasibility of Flipped Classroom Model in College English Writing Classrooms via ICLASS Platform.
J. Beijing Univ. Post Telecommun. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2017, 19, 87–93.
31. Huang, D.M. Empirical research of FCM on University Students’ English Learning Anxiety. J. PLA Univ. Foreign Lang. 2021, 10,
26–33.
32. Gao, T.; Zhao, X.Y. A Survey of English Major’s Engagement in the Flipped Classroom. Lang. Educ. 2017, 5, 69–74.
33. Yang, R.-C.C. An Investigation of the use of the ‘flipped classroom’ pedagogy in secondary English language classrooms. J. Inf.
Educ. Innov. Pract. 2017, 16, 1–20.
34. Zhang, F. Quality-improving strategies of college English teaching based on microlesson and flipped classroom. Engl. Lang. Teach.
2017, 10, 243–249. [CrossRef]
35. Ekmekci, E. The flipped writing classroom in Turkish EFL context: A comparative study on a new model. Turk. Online J. Distance
Educ. 2017, 18, 151–167. [CrossRef]
36. Egbert, J.; Herman, D.; Lee, H. Flipped instruction in English language teacher education: A design-based study in a complex,
open-ended learning environment. Electron. J. Engl. A Second Lang. 2015, 19, 1–23.
37. Creswell, J.; Plano Clark, V. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications: Los Angeles, CA, USA,
2011; pp. 64–101.
38. Dörnyei, Z. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methodologies; Oxford University Press:
Oxford, UK, 2007; pp. 163–175.
39. Cohen, L.; Manion, L.; Morrison, K. Research Methods in Education, 8th ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2018; pp. 774–775.
40. Comber, D.; Brady-Van den Bos, M. Too much, too soon? A critical investigation into factors that make Flipped Classrooms
effective. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 2018, 37, 683–697. [CrossRef]
41. Hsieh, C.J.S.; Wu, W.-C.V.; Marek, M.W. Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2017,
30, 1–21. [CrossRef]

Sustainability 14 05983 v3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 14 05983 v3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

Sustainability 2022, 14, 5983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105983 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2.2. Learner Engagement

2.2.2. The Construct of Learner Engagement

Fredricks et al. [6] provided a more comprehensive categorisation of student engage-

Table 1. Four-dimension learner engagement and the indicators.

Learners’ active participation and

2.3. Learner Engagement in the Flipped EFL Classroom

2.4. The F-L-I-PTM Model

2.5. Research Questions

3.3. Instruction Procedures

3.3.2. The Non-Flipped Classroom

Table 2. Instructional process of the flipped and non-flipped classroom.

Non-Flipped Classroom Flipped Classroom

3.3.3. The Flipped Classroom

3.4. Data Collection and Analysis

a = 0.857), cognitive engagement (8 items, a = 0.844), and social engagement (5 items,

3.4.2. Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

Table 3. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class pre-test results.

Engagement Class N Mean SD t p

Table 4. Comparison of the flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.

Engagement Flipped Class N Mean SD t p

Table 5. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class post-test results.

Engagement Class N Mean SD t p

Table 6. Comparison of the non-flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.

Engagement Non-Flipped N Mean SD t p

4.2.1. Positive Factors

4.2.2. Negative Factors

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Appendix A. Engagement Questionnaires

2. I put effort into learning in this English language class. 在英语课上我努力学习. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I completed my English homework on time. 我按时完成英语作业. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I didn’t participate much in my English language class. 我在英语课上参与度不高. 1 2 3 4 5

9. I looked forward to my English language class. 我很期待英语课. 1 2 3 4 5

10. I enjoyed learning new things about languages in class. 在课上我喜欢学习语言相关的新知识. 1 2 3 4 5

12. I often felt frustrated in my English language class. 英语课上, 我经常有挫败感. 1 2 3 4 5

13. I felt good when I was in my English language class. 在英语课上我感到愉悦. 1 2 3 4 5

14. I didn’t care about learning English. 我不在乎英语学习. 1 2 3 4 5

15. I was willing to communicate in English in the English class. 我愿意在英语课上用英语交流. 1 2 3 4 5

16. I didn’t want to be in my English language class. 我不想上英语课. 1 2 3 4 5

1. I think that the English language class was boring. 我认为英语课无聊. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I look forward to having more English courses of this kind. 我期待未来能上更多此种类型的英语课. 1 2 3 4 5

Appendix B. Part of Interview Questions

You might also like