Students' Perceptions of Creativity in Learning Information Technology (IT) in Project Groups

14678535, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13250 by University of Piraeus, Wiley Online Library on [03/12/2022].
See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Received: 30 January 2022 | Accepted: 24 May 2022
DOI: 10.1111/bjet.13250
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
An evaluation of the impact of

flipped-classroom teaching on mathematics
proficiency and self-efficacy in Saudi Arabia
Badriah Algarni1 | Hugues Lortie-Forgues2
1
Department of Education, University of
York, York, UK Abstract
2
Department of Mathematics Education, The flipped classroom (FC) is becoming an increas-
Loughborough University, Loughborough,
UK ingly popular teaching method in mathematics educa-
Correspondence tion. However, few studies have rigorously evaluated
Badriah Algarni, Phd student, The its effectiveness, and less so in countries where stu-
University of York, Heslington, York,
YO105DD, UK. dents' level of mathematics achievement is low. In this
Email: bmh.1407@gmail.com
study, we evaluated the impact of an FC intervention
Funding information
Minstry of Education Saudi Arabia in Saudi Arabia, the country with the lowest level of
maths achievement in the last iteration of the Trends
International Mathematics and Science Study TIMSS .
A total of 281 secondary school students received
eight weeks of algebra training using either FC or tra-
ditional instruction, and were tested on algebra prob-
lems taken from past national standardised tests, as
well as on a measure of self-efficacy. Students who
received the intervention showed higher self-efficacy
but no significant difference in maths achievement
was observed. Students' and teachers' perceptions
of the intervention were positive.
KEYWORDS
algebra, achievement, flipped classroom, self-efficacy
© 2022 British Educational Research Association.
Br J Educ Technol. 2022;00:1–22. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bjet | 1

14678535, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13250 by University of Piraeus, Wiley Online Library on [03/12/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 | ALGARNI and LORTIE-F ORGUES
Practitioner notes
What is already known about this topic
• The flipped classroom is an increasingly popular teaching method in mathematics
education.
• There is evidence that the method is beneficial for students.
• However, there have been very few rigorous evaluation studies of flipped classrooms
and most were conducted in the US, Taiwan and China.
• Whether the beneficial impact of flipped classrooms can be generalised to other coun-
tries, particularly countries with low proficiency in mathematics, remains unclear.
What this paper adds
• We evaluated the impact of the flipped classroom in Saudi Arabia, a country with low
proficiency in mathematics and limited technological resources.
• We used a rigorous design (with a control group) and educationally relevant outcome
measures.
• We found that a flipped classroom can have a positive impact on students' self-
efficacy, and that the method was perceived positively by both teachers and students.
• Based on interview data, we also documented the perceptions and concerns of the
participating teachers.
Implications for practice and/or policy
• Flipped classrooms showed promising results in a context which differs markedly
from previous evaluations, suggesting that the method can be beneficial in a range of
contexts.
• This positive impact was observed despite the intervention being relatively short (six
weeks) and implemented by teachers previously unfamiliar with the flipped classroom
method.
In the flipped classroom (FC) technique, learning material is delivered before classroom time
(through video lectures, for example), and classroom time is used to enhance understanding of
that material, usually through interactive group activities (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Bishop &
Verleger, 2013). The technique contrasts with more traditional approaches in which classroom
time is typically spent lecturing (Deslauriers et al., 2011). The FC allows students to approach
new material in their own time and at their own pace in advance of the class, enabling teachers
to use class time to address difficulties and misconceptions (O'Flaherty & Phillips, 2015).
FC I N M ATH E M ATI CS E DUCATI O N
FC is becoming a popular teaching method in mathematics education and has been used
to teach a variety of topics such as calculus, algebra and statistics in both K-12 and higher
education settings (Lo et al., 2017). Much evidence suggests that it has a positive im-
pact, particularly on students' maths achievement (Bhagat et al., 2016; Cilli-Turner, 2015;
Lo & Hew, 2017b), but also on students' maths self-efficacy (Vang, 2017; Wiginton, 2013;
Yorganci, 2020). This evidence will be briefly reviewed next.
Impact on mathematics achievement
There are reasons to expect that FC can improve maths achievement. One is that it gives
more time for teachers to address misconceptions and provide feedback, and for students to
AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF FLIPPED-C LASSROOM
TEACHING ON MATHEMATICS PROFICIENCY | 3
apply their knowledge and work collaboratively with their peers (Lo et al., 2017). Another is
that the availability of recorded lectures enables students to revisit topics when clarification
is needed, helping them to better consolidate their knowledge (Love et al., 2014).
Several studies have shown that FC has a beneficial impact on maths achievement.
A recent meta- analysis reported an average effect on achievement of 0.30 Standard
Deviations (SDs) (95% CI: 0.16 to 0.44), with most studies (81%) showing a positive impact
(Lo et al., 2017). Wilson's (2013) evaluation of FC in an undergraduate statistics course
found a significant benefit of FC over traditional teaching, with an effect of 0.69 SDs; a large
effect in comparison with the small impact of most educational interventions (Lortie-Forgues
& Inglis, 2019).
An important limitation of the evidence of FC's beneficial impact on achievement is the
small number of rigorous evaluations. Of 1219 evaluations initially identified by Lo et al. (2017),
only 21 were deemed rigorous enough for inclusion in their meta-analytic estimate of FC's
impact (see the Method section of Lo et al. (2017) for inclusion criteria).
Another issue is the generalisability. Of these 21 studies, 18 were conducted in the US,
(the remaining three in Germany, New Zealand and Taiwan), and most (17 of the 21) were
conducted at undergraduate level. It is unclear how well Lo et al.'s (2017) estimate of the im-
pact of FC can be generalised to other contexts, particularly given the large variation in the
estimates reported: the large variance in effect sizes (ranging from -0.16 SDs to 1.14 SDs),
and the degree of heterogeneity (variation beyond that expected by sampling variation;
I2 = 72%) suggest that the impact of FC teaching is particularly susceptible to the influence
of extraneous factors. Thus, whether the beneficial impact of FC can be generalised to new
contexts becomes an important question, which this current study explores.
Impact on mathematics self-efficacy
Another important outcome is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is considered one of the strong-

est determinants of motivation (Bandura, 1986). Mathematics self-efficacy relates to
individuals' perceptions or beliefs about their mathematical abilities (Bandura, 1997).
Students with high levels of maths self-efficacy typically achieve higher levels of perfor-
mance, set higher goals and are more resilient when facing difficulties (Bandura, 1997;
Schunk & Pajares, 2002). They are also more likely to pursue careers in the science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields (Usher & Pajares, 2009).
Unsurprisingly, maths achievement and self- efficacy are often strongly associated
(Hackett & Betz, 1989). Ayotola and Adedeji (2009), for example, reported a correlation
of r = 0.73 between mathematics achievement and self-efficacy in a sample of secondary
school students.
Again, FC seems particularly well-suited to improving students' self-efficacy. For exam-
ple, the FC requirement for the self-directed learning of out-of-class material promotes stu-
dents' ownership of their learning process, an important determinant of self-efficacy (Lai
& Hwang, 2016; Wiginton, 2013). FC could also increase students' self-efficacy due to the
improved quality of student/teacher interactions and to the greater number of opportuni-
ties which students have to observe their peers mastering skills (Usher & Pajares, 2009;
Vang, 2017). Predictably, most studies evaluating the impact of FC on self-efficacy yield
positive results. For example, Wiginton (2013) reported higher levels of self- efficacy
among FC students than those receiving traditional teaching (d > 0.76 SDs). More recently,
Yorganci (2020) found that the self-efficacy of students in maths was substantially higher in
a flipped learning group than in two other teaching methods.
We could not find a study showing a negative impact of FC on self-efficacy. Nevertheless,
most of the current evidence was gathered in Western or high- achieving East Asian
countries. Exploring whether FC's impact on self-efficacy differs when evaluated in a low-
achieving country is another goal of this study.
The flipped mathematics classroom and students' perceptions
Even if FC has a positive impact on important outcomes, it is necessary to examine how the
method is perceived by students and teachers. Negative perceptions could reduce students'
compliance and minimise the potential benefits of the intervention (Turco & Elliott, 1986).
Students might perceive FC favourably because it gives them a sense of competence and
autonomy, often resulting in higher motivation and achievement (Zainuddin & Perera, 2019).
The use of technology is also likely to be perceived positively (Bergmann & Sams, 2012).
Various studies have suggested that FC is generally perceived positively by students. Bhagat
et al. (2016), for example, found that most students considered tackling mathematical tasks
in a FC enjoyable and effective. Appreciated features include teachers' individual assistance
(Clark, 2015) and the way in which video lectures enabled students to prepare for class ac-
tivities and to study at their own pace, at times and in places which they found convenient
(Song & Kapur, 2017).
Other studies have suggested that FC, or at least some of its features, can be perceived
negatively by students. Cilli-Turner (2015) found that most students did not enjoy a flipped
statistics course. DeSantis et al. (2015) also reported lower satisfaction with the flipped
classroom compared with the traditional classroom. Wasserman et al. (2017) observed dis-
satisfaction with an FC undergraduate calculus course in the USA, particularly regarding
the sub-optimal use of class time, which could be attributed to a lack of teacher training. In
a Taiwanese study, students found learning at home before lessons difficult, leading some
of them to skip mandatory pre-class activities (Chen et al., 2016).
This ambivalence is consistent with the findings of a recent meta-analysis of 271 students
(not limited to mathematics), which found only a weak influence of FC on student satisfaction
(Låg & Sæle, 2019).
Limitations of previous studies of FC
The differences in outcomes reported in studies of FC in mathematics education can be

attributed to two factors: differences in the design of the FC courses investigated and dif-
ferences in research methodology, especially as most of those studies were not based on a
theoretical framework or empirical principles to guide their implementation (Kim et al., 2014;
Lo et al., 2017; O'Flaherty & Phillips, 2015; Song et al., 2017). For example, O'Flaherty and
Phillips (2015) pointed out that the current FC studies underutilised conceptual frameworks
and pedagogical designs and they called for more powerful evidence in the evaluation of
student outcomes in a FC. A need has been asserted for empirically based principles, rather
than mere teacher intuition, to guide the design and implementation of flipped courses (Lo
et al., 2017). There was a lack of consistency in the reporting of the studies of FC de-
signs in the past, and there were variations in the designs and methodologies used. Lo
et al. (2017) reviewed 60 studies, most of them conducted in the US and carried out at the
undergraduate level, and found that FC designs varied in length, intensity, organisation,
material, compulsory or voluntary attendance and types of video. For example, the stud-
ies varied widely in length from two weeks (DeSantis et al., 2015) to a full academic year
(Muir & Geiger, 2016). Moreover, video creation was also highly variable; some studies used
teacher-created videos (Anderson & Brennan, 2015; Murphy et al., 2016) and others used
ready-to-use online videos such as Khan Academy and YouTube (Kirvan et al., 2015). Also,
in most studies, preclass videos were administered only for the flipped class. Others, such as
Young et al. (2015), made the videos which were created for the flipped class available to the
students in the control group. Additionally, some studies were conducted in a single class-
room, with no reference to a comparison group (Chen et al., 2016; Grypp & Luebeck, 2015;
Muir & Geiger, 2016). Some of the studies had used matched pre-and posttests (Bhagat
et al., 2016), which raises the issue of the effect of practice, whilst others applied only a post-
test achievement measure (Braun et al., 2014). Furthermore, in some studies, the flipped
and control groups were taught by the same teachers (Kirvan et al., 2015), whereas in oth-
ers, they were taught by different teachers (Van Sickle, 2016). In addition, there was varia-
tion in participants' ages and their ability levels. This current study is therefore intended to fill
this gap in the literature by designing a FC intervention based on design principles created
by Lo et al. (2017), all of which were established on the basis of relevant empirical evidence.
The literature suggested that further study of the FC should be done in secondary educa-
tion because a large proportion of previous and current studies had concentrated on higher
education. In Lo et al.'s (2017) review, only five empirical studies (Bhagat et al., 2016; Chen
et al., 2016; Clark, 2015; DeSantis et al., 2015; Kirvan et al., 2015) were conducted in high-
school mathematics classes, and four of them (Bhagat et al., 2016; Clark, 2015; DeSantis
et al., 2015; Kirvan et al., 2015) specifically compared the FC with traditional learning based
on lectures. For this reason, it is not clear whether the FC will work with high-school stu-
dents. Because the FC depends mainly on the student, and the teacher acts as a guide
in the learning process, high-school students need particular skills to succeed, such as
being independent learners. In addition, there is a dearth of research which has looked at
the potential effect of the FC approach in enhancing students' mathematical self-efficacy.
Measuring students' self-efficacy is very important because of the strong connection it has
with achievement and other important academic outcomes such as students' motivation and
the increased interest in STEM subjects (for example, Winne & Hadwin, 2008).
FC teaching in Saudi Arabia
The present study took place in Saudi Arabia, where low achievement in mathematics is
a serious concern (Bakr Khoshaim & Ali, 2015). In the most recent Trends International
Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, 2015), the average mathematics attainment of
Saudi Arabian fourth-graders (383 points) and eighth-graders (368 points) was substantially
lower than the average score of 500 (SD = 100). In fact, Saudi Arabia's eighth-graders
had the lowest performance of all of the participating countries. In the most recent iteration
of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Programme for
International Student Assessment (PISA), Saudi Arabia's mathematics achievement ranked
74th out of the 79 countries tested (373 points compared with 478 in the US (OECD, 2018).
In addition to Saudi Arabia's low performance in mathematics, other features of the edu-
cation system could potentially influence the impact of FC. One of them is the technological
factor. Studies have suggested that Saudi Arabian teachers often lack the training and prepa-
ration to implement technological learning resources (Alebaikan & Troudi, 2016), and have
noted shortages of technological resources such as Internet connections and computers
(Alkahtani, 2017). Considering that FC is a technology-driven approach and that its success
depends on the technical competency of the teachers implementing it (Lo & Hew, 2017a),
implementing this teaching method in Saudi Arabia might pose unique challenges. Another
potential difficulty is that the teaching approach in Saudi schools is typically based on rote
learning and memorisation rather than on the creative and independent thinking promoted
by FC (Rugh, 2002). Moreover, Saudi Arabian teachers are constrained by centrally imposed
teaching policies with limited teacher participation in curriculum development (Alebaikan &
Troudi, 2016). Not surprisingly, few Saudi Arabian teachers are familiar with the FC method
(Alzahrani, 2019).
Despite these difficulties, the Saudi Government is committed to developing the use
of technology in education (Al-Zahrani, 2015). In its Vision 2030 reform plan, the Saudi
Government expressed the aim of improving access to and the adoption of new technol-
ogies for constructive educational purposes (Nurunnabi, 2017). The recent need to move
teaching online due to the Covid-19 pandemic is also likely to further interest in the use of
technology in education. Considering these factors, it is important to evaluate whether FC
could be an effective alternative to traditional teaching in Saudi Arabia.
Research questions
This study addresses three questions: “What is the impact of FC on the mathematical pro-
ficiency of students from Saudi Arabia? What is the impact of FC on the self-efficacy of
students from Saudi Arabia? and What are the students' and Teacher's perceptions of FC?”
M ETHO DS
Research design
We used a pre-and posttest control group design to examine the effect of the implementa-
tion of the FC on students' maths achievement and self-efficacy, as well as a combination of
questionnaire and semi-structured interview to survey the students' and teachers' percep-
tions of the FC (see Figure 1).
Context and participants
This study was conducted in Saudi Arabia over a nine-week period. A total of 281 students
(all female, 16–17 years old) from four secondary schools participated (142 students in the
intervention group, 139 in the control group). Since education in Saudi Arabia is gender-
segregated and a female researcher cannot access boys' schools, all of the participants
were female. The students were from ten classes led by five full-time mathematics teachers
(all female, mean years of teaching experience: M = 12.2; SD = 4.14). They were homogene-
ous in terms of gender, age (16–17 years), and level of competence (determined based on
the pretest). The students were mainly from a Saudi background, with some students (about
5%) having a non-Saudi Arab heritage, such as Egyptian, Syrian and Yemeni. Pretesting
was conducted to ensure that the mathematical capacities of the two groups were equiva-
lent. Convenience sampling was used to select the participants for this study, which is a
specific type of non-probability sampling meaning that the participants were conveniently
available to participate and willing to be involved in this study (Creswell, 2014). The research
aims and objectives were sent to all maths teachers in Jeddah district to seek their partici-
pation. Five teachers in four different schools agreed to take part. Teachers were chosen
based on their interest in FC implementation. Each teacher was asked to randomly select
one of their classrooms to receive flipped mathematics instruction (the intervention group),
and another to receive traditional instruction (the control group). This within-teacher design,
in which each teacher took part in both the intervention and the control groups, enabled us
to better separate the influence of the teacher from the effect of the intervention (Melnyk &
Morrison- Beedy, 2018).
FIGURE 1 Flowchart displaying the research design and timing of the different measurements.
We determined the required sample size based on the weighted average effect of FC
(0.3 SDs) found by Lo et al. (2017). Algebra proficiency and self-efficacy were measured
before and after the intervention, enabling us to include baseline scores as a covariate in
our regression model. Assuming a pre-/posttest correlation of r = 0.7—a reasonable as-
sumption given the short time interval between the two measures—the number of partici-
pants needed to obtain a reasonable chance (80%) of detecting an effect of 0.3 SDs was
deemed to be 180 participants in total. We recruited more participants than this (n = 281)
to account for the fact that they were clustered within teachers—who in turn were clus-
tered within schools—and that the estimated impact in Lo et al. (2017) could be overes-
timated (see, for example, McShane & Böckenholt, 2014). Although we could not find a
meta-analysis summarising the effect which FC has on self-efficacy, a survey of the litera-
ture suggested that 281 was also a reasonable number of participants to detect the impact
of FC on that outcome.
Students in the intervention and the control groups had comparable backgrounds and
learning experience. All students in the intervention group had access to either a computer
(65% of students) or a mobile device (94%). Table 1 summarises the distribution of students
within schools and teachers. The mathematical content covered in the experiment was
based on the Saudi Arabian mathematics curriculum (IEN National Education Portal, 2019).
Table S.1 lists the mathematical content covered.
Procedure and content of the intervention
The implementation of the FC was based on Lo et al.'s (2017) ten design principles for FC
mathematics. These principles focused on three aspects: transition to the FC (Principles
1 and 2), out-of-class learning designs (Principles 3 and 4), and in-class learning designs
(Principles 5–10). Table S.2 shows how each principle was implemented in our version of
the FC.
Out-of-class activities
Out-of-class materials (videos and quizzes) were made available to students on Moodle, a
free, open-source learning management system (Rice, 2006). Moodle recorded the online
behaviour of the students, including the time and date of access, the IP address from which
the access request originated, usernames, types of action and the time that students spent
on each activity, enabling teachers to monitor their students' progress.
Video lectures
Sixty-three video lectures on key mathematical concepts covered during the study were
designed by the first author to ensure consistency across the participants and were posted
weekly (ten videos in weeks 1, 2 and 5, and eleven videos in weeks 3, 4 and 6). The video
lectures were in Arabic (the language of the participants). None of the videos exceeded 6
minutes. All were reviewed by the head of the mathematics department in the district and
by the participating teachers before being presented to the students. Videos followed Guo
TA B L E 1 Overview of the participants
Intervention group Control group
School Teacher N of students N of students

1 A 32 35
1 B 31 30
2 C 21 18
3 D 27 28
4 E 31 28
Total 142 139
et al.'s (2014) production guidelines and Mayer's (2005) cognitive theory of multimedia learn-
ing, and used a write-whilst-speaking video format, which generates more engagement than
a static computer-generated font (Cross et al., 2013).
Online quizzes
After watching each video, students were asked to complete a short quiz on the ma-
terials presented. Eighteen quizzes were designed (about three each week), each
containing two to three multiple-c hoice questions. Students were given immediate
feedback on their draft answers, which they could correct before submitting their final
answers. The participants were asked to show their teachers written evidence of quiz
completion.
In-class activities
In-class activities were designed to promote active learning and group-based problem solv-
ing. Teachers were recommended to start the class with structured formative assessments,
such as quizzes, to assess their students' handling of the out-of-class materials. Based on
Kirvan et al.'s (2015) method, we suggested that the teachers should give students brief
one-to three-question quizzes, and sort the students into an exploration and a re-teaching
group based on their performance. The exploration group took part in collaborative learning,
problem solving, discussion and feedback, in addition to individual or group-based activities.
Students in the re-teaching group reviewed sections of the lessons which they had misun-
derstood and joined the exploration groups once the teacher had judged their understanding
to be adequate.
Preintervention training
Preceding the start of the study, teachers and intervention group students completed a two-
hour training session on FC and how to use Moodle. The training included a PowerPoint
presentation and printed supporting materials were provided. The training also included
practical sessions to familiarise students with online independent learning and to provide
any required assistance for tasks such as downloading materials and setting up accounts. In
addition, several visits were made each week to assist teachers and students in their transi-
tion to flipped learning.
Traditional instruction
In the control (traditional instruction) groups, teaching time was used mainly to deliver a
lecture or to practise problem solving. The class time, 45 minutes, was divided into three
phases: the teacher's revision of homework questions, a lecture lasting about 20 minutes,
and the remaining time was used to engage students in class activities. At the end of each
class, teachers assigned homework consisting of four to six maths problems based on the
lesson content for students to complete individually before the next lesson. None of the ma-
terial was presented online or in advance of the lesson.
Outcome measures
Outcome measures comprised pre-and postmeasures of algebra proficiency, pre-and

postmeasures of mathematics self-efficacy, a postintervention survey examining students'
perceptions of the intervention, and an interview to assess teachers' perceptions of the in-
tervention. All the measures were conducted in Arabic.
Pre- and postintervention algebra proficiency test
Both tests comprised 30 multiple-choice items for a maximum score of 30. Both tests
lasted for one hour. All the questions were taken from the maths section of the Scholastic
Achievement Admission Test (SAAT) from the previous four years (2015, 2016, 2017 and
2018). The SAAT is taken by all high-school students in Saudi Arabia, and their scores are
used to inform university admission (Bakr Khoshaim & Ali, 2015). Questions in the pre-and
posttests differed in their content to minimise potential practice effect. Their content was of
comparable difficulty and covered the same topics. Both tests showed adequate reliability
(pretest: α = 0.78; posttest: α = 0.87). Tables S.3 and S.4 present the pre-and postversions
of the achievement test.
Pre- and postintervention mathematical self-efficacy questionnaire
Self-efficacy was measured using items from Usher and Pajares's (2009) Sources of Self-
Efficacy in Mathematics questionnaire (SSEM). Two sub-scales were administered (mastery
experiences and social persuasion), totalling twelve items (see Table 2). These two sub-
scales were chosen as they are both relevant to FC and are considered to be important
factors in increasing student confidence (Bandura, 1997). Mastery experience has been
shown to reliably predict students' self-efficacy across a range of academic levels and do-
mains (Usher & Pajares, 2009). Social persuasion, the influence of external support from
people important to the students, has been suggested to bolster a student's effort and self-
confidence (Bandura, 1997).
For each scale, students had to rate their confidence in their ability for each of the state-
ments using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = definitely false to 5 = definitely true). The original
questions and response scales were translated into Arabic by a language expert. The inter-
nal consistency of the sub-scales was as follows: for mastery experience, pretest: α = 0.86;
posttest: α = 0.88, and for social persuasion, pretest: α = 0.81; posttest: α = 0.84. The
internal consistency of the overall scale was high (pretest: α = 0.89; posttest: α = 0.90).
Descriptive statistics of the students' pre-and postscores are presented in Tables S.5 and
S.6.
TA B L E 2 Descriptive statistics of the two groups
Time Groups N M SD
Pretest Intervention 142 16.51 5.16
Control 139 15.84 4.85
Posttest Intervention 142 21.01 6.50
Control 139 19.99 5.95
Students' and teachers' perceptions of the FC
Students' perceptions
Students' perceptions of the flipped model were measured using Sletten's (2015) 30-item
scale focusing on two key dimensions: flipped video and flipped class. Perceptions of flipped
video comprised four sub-scales: (a) video preference (three items), (b) video value (seven
items), (c) technical aspects of accessing videos (six items), and (d) viewing frequency (three
items). Perceptions of flipped class consisted of two sub-scales: value active learning (seven
items), and learning enhancement (four items). Participants rated each item on a 5-point
Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not at all true of me) to 5 (very true of me). Reliability coefficients
of each sub-scale and of the entire questionnaire ranged from α = 0.79 to α = 0.89. Only
students in the intervention group completed the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics of the
students' perceptions are presented in S.7.
Teachers' perceptions
Semi-structured interviews were conducted at the end of the study to gather qualitative in-
formation on the teachers' perceptions of FC. The interviews were audio recorded (with the
interviewees' permission) and lasted about 30 minutes each.
DATA A N A LYS I S PROCE DUR E
Analysis of quantitative data was performed using R Linear Mixed-Effects Models (Bates
et al., 2014). To test whether the intervention had a significant impact on maths achievement
and on self-efficacy, we constructed mixed-effects models with posttest score as Dependent
Variable (DV), condition (intervention vs. control) and pretest score as fixed factors, and, as
random effects, intercepts for school and for teachers (nested within school). This analysis
enabled us to minimise any baseline differences on the DVs between the two experimental
groups, as well as to consider the dependency caused by students being clustered within
schools and teachers.
Analysis of students' and teachers' perceptions was carried out descriptively using fre-
quency analysis and thematic analysis. Thematic analysis was used with the interview data
by following the six phases identified by Braun and Clarke (2006). This qualitative analysis
was conducted on the original untranslated transcripts. Member checking was carried out to
enhance the reliability: the transcripts were emailed to the five teachers for them to confirm
their accuracy (Lincoln & Guba, 1986). Quotations (raw data) were selectively translated into
English in order to add authenticity to the findings (see Table S.8).
R ESULTS
Participation
There was no attrition of the sample during the intervention. Participation in the out-of-class
activities was high: on average, students accessed 83% of the videos (SD: 26) and completed
90% of the quizzes (SD: 18%). However, comparison of the first and second halves of the in-
tervention revealed a significant decrease in video access (from 88% to 78%, t(141) = 38.15,
p < 0.001), and in quiz completion (from 92% to 86%, t(141) = 59.01, p < 0.001).
Algebra proficiency
Performances in the pre-and posttest were intervention pre: M = 16.51; post: M = 21.01,
and control pre: M = 15.84; post: M = 19.99 respectively, suggesting no floor or ceiling ef-
fects. Algebra performances in the pre-and posttest were strongly correlated r(280) = 0.75,
p < 0.001. As shown in Table 2, algebra proficiency at the pretest did not differ between
groups (t(279) = 1.11, p = 0.267), suggesting that both groups were of comparable ability
prior to the intervention.
The posttest mean score of the intervention group (M = 21.01) was slightly higher than
that of the control group (M = 19.99). The impact of condition was not statistically significant
t(275.05) = 0.801, p = 0.424 (see Table S.9 for a full list of coefficients). The between-group
difference on the posttest corresponded to a standardised effect size of 0.06 SDs.1 The
interaction was not significant, showing no evidence of different impact related to students'
prestudy algebra knowledge.
We also explored the performance of the two groups on each sub-component of the
posttest. No group differences were significant after correcting for multiple comparisons (see
Table S.7). In addition, we explored the impact of the intervention by the teacher. Figure 2
shows that for all the teachers except one (Teacher B), the group receiving the intervention
obtained a comparable or higher posttest score than the control group.
Self-efficacy
No significant differences were found between the self-efficacy scores of the two groups at
baseline (t(279) = −0.2, p = 0.842), suggesting that both groups had comparable levels of
self-efficacy at the beginning of the study. Self-efficacy at the pre-and posttests was highly
correlated r(280) = 0.83, p < 0.001 (see Table 3).
On the posttest, students in the intervention group had higher levels of self-efficacy than
students in the control group: t(274.05) = 4.75, p < 0.001 (see Table S.10 for the full list of
coefficients of the mixed model). The standardized difference between the self-efficacy of
the two groups corresponds to an effect size d = 0.30 SDs, suggesting that FC can increase
students' self-efficacy substantially. To explore whether the intervention's impact on self-
efficacy was influenced by the students' initial level of self-efficacy, the model was re-tested
including the interaction term ‘Pre-test score × Condition’. The interaction was not statisti-
cally significant. Table 4 shows that the intervention group had higher levels of self-efficacy
on all subscales.
F I G U R E 2 Pre-and postscores on the algebra proficiency test of participants in the intervention and
control condition by teacher.
TA B L E 3 Comparison of average self-efficacy score of both groups on pre-and posttest
Time Groups N M SD
Pretest Intervention 142 40.74 9.70
Control 139 40.96 9.11
Posttest Intervention 142 44.84 10.02
Control 139 42.10 9.77
TA B L E 4 Descriptive results for students' post-self-efficacy by scale
Control
Subcomponent N. questions Intervention group group
Mastery Experience 6 22.85 (5.27) 21.84 (5.21)
Social persuasion 6 21.92 (5.62) 19.96 (4.86)
Note: Numbers in parenthesis are standard deviations.
FIGURE 3 Pre-and postscore self-efficacy scores of students in the intervention and control condition by
teacher.
Additionally, as shown in Figure 3, a teacher-by-teacher analysis shows that for all the
teachers except one (Teacher C), the intervention group displayed a higher post-self-efficacy
than the control group.
Consistent with past literature (eg, Ayotola & Adedeji, 2009), students' algebra proficiency
and self-efficacy were moderately to strongly associated (pretest: r = 0.432; p < 0.001,
posttest r = 0.547; p < 0.001).
Perceptions of FC
Students' perceptions
Overall, the FC instruction appeared to have been well received by the students: 81% agreed
or strongly agreed with the statement ‘This course as a whole has been a valuable learning
experience’ (M = 4.20, SD = 1.05). Similarly, 70% of the students agreed or strongly agreed
with ‘I would take another flipped course’ (M = 3.99, SD = 1.06).
In the whole survey, the statements which received the highest agreement were ‘I like the
fact that I can re-watch lectures any time so I can gain a deeper understanding of the ma-
terial’ and ‘The ability to rewind the video lecture helps me learn from the value of the video
subscale’ (M = 4.48, SD = 0.87 and M = 4.41, SD = 0.81, respectively). Regarding technical
aspects, the strongest agreement was found for ‘The video lectures for this course are easy
to use’ (M = 4.49, SD = 0.76). However, nearly half of the students, 46.5%, indicated their
neutral view (32.4%) or disagreement (14.1%) with the statement ‘There are opportunities
to ask questions on the assigned lecture if I need clarification on the material’ (M = 3.61,
SD = 1.06), suggesting that students might need more opportunities to interact with their
teacher. In terms of in-class activities, the students positively rated the two statements ‘I
find that in-class activities make class more useful’ (M = 4.27, SD = 0.89) and ‘Interactive,
applied in-class activities greatly enhance my learning’ (M = 4.53, SD = 0.71). However,
40% of the students were neutral in regard to the statement ‘I find that individual access to
lectures has increased my desire to learn the material’ (M = 3.65, SD = 1.04). In addition,
nearly half of the students (49.3%) indicated that they had encountered technical difficulties
when trying to watch the video lectures (M = 3.15, SD = 1.34). For full descriptive statistics,
see Table S.9.
Teachers' perceptions
The postintervention interviews with the teachers also revealed generally positive percep-
tions of FC. Four of the five teachers were happy to continue with flipped classes and indi-
cated that they would recommend FC to other teachers. Other responses were categorised
into the following four themes.
Benefits of in-class activities

The two main benefits reported by teachers were students' increased interaction with teach-
ers and peers, and the benefits of preassessment. Regarding the former, all five teachers
noted that students in the intervention group benefited from additional in-class time to en-
gage with the content. Additionally, three teachers said that having a quiz at the beginning of
the face-to-face session informed their class practice and improved students' engagement
and participation in the in-class sessions.
Benefits of out-of-class activities

All five teachers appreciated the value of the video lectures to enhance students' learning.
They valued the ability for students to rewind, stop and re-watch the content again. Teachers
also appreciated that students came to class prepared to explore and collaborate with their
peers and groups as they had already gained a general understanding of the topic(s) from
the videos. Additionally, the benefits of the online follow-up exercises were appreciated by
all teachers as enriching practice and preparing the students for in-class activities. In addi-
tion, three teachers commented positively on using a learning management system to track
student learning and be aware of their students' performance in the online quizzes.
Benefits of the FC in general

As mentioned earlier, the teachers were generally pleased with the intervention. Perceived
benefits included enhanced teaching efficiency, increased active learning opportunities for
students, and more time to adapt teaching to the unique needs of each student. Three teach-
ers mentioned that in the intervention group, they felt less stress in trying to cover all the
content studied, compared with the traditional classroom. Additionally, teachers agreed that
FC can accommodate different learning needs, providing support for lower achievers and
enabling higher achievers to practise higher-order tasks.
Challenges associated with the FC

All of the teachers commented that the students' lack of reliable Internet connection is
potentially the most challenging factor in flipped learning. In addition, four teachers were
concerned about how best to encourage students to watch the videos before class. Four
teachers mentioned that their workload would increase considerably if they had to design
and edit the videos themselves, and one teacher noted the need for intensive training and
support.
D I SCUSS I O N
This study evaluated the impact of using an FC intervention in secondary schools in Saudi
Arabia, a country with a low level of proficiency in mathematics. The intervention was based
on validated principles taken from Lo et al.'s (2017) meta-analysis, unlike many previous FC
evaluation studies (Bishop & Verleger, 2013; O'Flaherty & Phillips, 2015). In a rigorous study,
the intervention group was compared with a control group receiving traditional teaching; the
sample size was chosen to detect a range of plausible effects, the measure of algebra pro-
ficiency was educationally relevant (based on national standardised tests), and the analy-
ses were controlled for students' preintervention performance and teachers' influence. The
impact on students' algebra proficiency and their self-efficacy, and students' and teachers'
perceptions of the intervention, were evaluated.
Algebra proficiency
The findings showed a positive, although not statistically significant, effect of FC on students'
algebra proficiency. This is consistent with the findings of previous studies revealing a small
impact of FC (Clark, 2015; Love et al., 2014: Yong et al., 2015). Moreover, the confidence in-
terval of our effect size (−0.09 to 0.22) overlapped with that of Lo et al.'s (2017) meta-analytic
estimate (0.30 SDs; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.44). There was no evidence that the impact varied
between the different sub-sections of the achievement test or that it was influenced by the
students' preintervention algebra proficiency.
It should be noted that standardised tests were used to measure achievement,
which typically produce smaller effect sizes and are less sensitive to the changes oc-
curring during the intervention than researcher-designed outcome measures (Akçayır
& Akçayır, 2018; Sénéchal & Young, 2008). Using an outcome measure more aligned
with the intervention could have enabled us to detect more subtle effects of FC teach-
ing but would have reduced the external validity of the study. Interestingly, the resulting
effect is the same as the average estimate of all the educational interventions tested in
rigorous randomised controlled trials reported in the US and the UK (Lortie-Forgues &
Inglis, 2019).
Another interesting aspect of the findings concerns the variation between teachers. As
shown in Figure 2, the difference in algebra proficiency between the intervention and control
groups at posttest varied considerably between teachers. The students in the intervention
groups led by Teachers A, D and E obtained a higher score than those in their respective
control group, whereas the same was not observed for the students led by Teachers B
and C. The postintervention interviews with the teachers offered some insight into the po-
tential causes of this variation (see Algarni, 2021, for a full account of the postintervention
interviews). During the interviews, teachers B and C mentioned that their students in the
intervention group often lacked the out-of-class preparation, a situation which they both
attributed to lack of motivation and, particularly for Teacher C, to some students having
difficulties accessing the out-of-class material due to an unreliable Internet connection or
parental restrictions. Both teachers noted that this lack of preparation had a negative impact
on the in-class activities. Although these observations may have been coincidental, they
do suggest potentially important moderators of the impact of FC on students' achievement.
Self-efficacy
In terms of the students' self-efficacy, we found significant differences between the flipped
group and the traditional instruction group even after controlling for baseline performance
and for dependency between participants. This finding is in line with the growing evidence of
FC's positive impact on students' self-efficacy (for example, Wiginton, 2013; Yorganci, 2020).
Better performance in the intervention group was observed on both the mastery experience
and social persuasion sub-scales of our measure of self-efficacy. Based on the teacher
interviews, we identified two major factors potentially contributing to enhancing students'
self- efficacy.
One factor was improved interaction and feedback. The move away from direct lectures
enabled teachers to interact more often with students and provide instant feedback, clarifi-
cation and support, aspects which have been suggested to improve student/teacher rela-
tionships (O'Flaherty & Phillips, 2015) and to motivate students to work harder (Margolis &
McCabe, 2006).
The other factor was the increased opportunity for active learning. Teachers perceived
this to be one of the main benefits of the FC and noted that doing more in-class activi-
ties gave students opportunities to engage with different maths problems and to master
challenges with the support of teachers and peers. According to social cognitive theory
(Bandura, 1986), providing such opportunities can increase students' self-efficacy through
the experience of achievement, resulting in increased motivation and effort.
We consider the improvement in self-efficacy to be particularly promising considering
the strong link between self-efficacy and other important academic outcomes such as
students' motivation and the increased interest in STEM subjects (for example, Winne &
Hadwin, 2008).
Interestingly, as with algebra proficiency, we also observed between-teacher variation in
the impact that the intervention had on students' self-efficacy (see Figure 3). In particular,
the students who received the intervention under Teacher C showed little pre-postimprove-
ment compared with the students led by the other teachers. Unfortunately, our analysis of
teachers' interview data does not provide a clear explanation for this variation. It is interest-
ing to note, however, that the students in the intervention group led by Teacher C had, on
average, considerably lower self-efficacy at baseline than the intervention groups led by the
other teachers. It is therefore possible that FC's beneficial impact on self-efficacy requires a
minimal level of self-efficacy.
Perceptions of the intervention
The participating students and teachers were generally satisfied with the FC approach. In
general, both teachers and students had positive perceptions of the video lectures. Students
appreciated the easy-to-use online videos and the ability to re-watch video lectures at any
time to help them to gain a greater understanding, which was the most widely agreed reason
for them valuing this pedagogical approach. These results were in line with the findings of
previous researchers such as Lo et al. (2018) and Lopes and Soares (2018) in that the par-
ticipating teachers indicated that this feature can benefit struggling students more because
it gives them the flexibility and time to interact more with the materials.
Students and teachers also perceived in-class activities positively. Students perceived
them as a useful way to enhance their learning. This may be due to the greater amount of
immediate feedback provided by teachers, since practice without immediate feedback can
lead to frustration (Hattie & Gan, 2011). In addition, the participating teachers considered
maximising class time and increasing student/student and teacher/student interactions
to be major advantages of the FC. These results support those of Lo et al. (2018) and
Braun et al. (2014). These positive findings are especially promising considering the doc-
umented tendency of students to generally dislike changes in teaching methods (Chen
et al., 2014).
Furthermore, the teachers emphasised the essential role of assessments in the FC, in-
cluding online follow-up exercises after watching video lectures and preassessment at the
beginning of each flipped class. These quizzes are essential for preparing students for in-
class activities and for helping teachers to manage these activities and check students'
understanding (Lo et al., 2018). Since this current study provided instant computerised feed-
back to students following completion of the out-of-class quizzes, students were able to
check their answers and correct any inaccurate first responses (Epstein et al., 2002). In ad-
dition, the teachers emphasised that the students' performance in the preassessment could
inform their in-class practice, since they divided students into exploration and re-teaching
groups based on their preassessment performance.
However, the participating teachers faced an issue of some students' lack of interest in
the out-of-class activities, which could affect their preparation. This issue has been reported
in several studies (for example, Lo et al., 2018; Palmer, 2015). How to increase student mo-
tivation thus remains a critical issue in the FC (Braun et al., 2014). Success in such learning
environments largely depends on the students' ability to participate independently and ac-
tively in the learning process. In addition, the teachers indicated their need for support and
training if they decided to flip their classes.
I M PLI CATI O NS
Although this study was carried out in a single country, the insights which it provides are of
potential interest and value for policymakers and practitioners across a variety of settings
where similar concerns and challenges are faced. Saudi Arabia is not alone in its ambition
to increase the integration of technology into various aspects of education, to prepare stu-
dents for the labour force and to advance educational reform, making students active learn-
ers. Similar concerns have been articulated, for example, in the Republic of Ireland, which
has pursued polices and strategies for technology integration since the 1970s (Alghamdi &
Holland, 2020). Moreover, similar challenges to those confronting Saudi Arabia are reported
in a variety of settings—not only in other Middle Eastern countries which have similar cul-
tures and education systems to Saudi Arabia (Kitsaki, 2011), but also outside the region,
including some Western countries. Similar to the situation in Saudi Arabia, there have been
reports from the US, for example, of limited teacher preparation to integrate technology in
teaching (Gray et al., 2010; Mullis et al., 2012), and teachers in various contexts, including
Turkey, some parts of China and the US, as well as Saudi Arabia, have reported low tech-
nology knowledge (Alqurashi et al., 2017; Ekrem & Recep, 2014; Li, 2018). Other issues
highlighted in this study have also been reported in other contexts, such as rote learn-
ing and the teacher-centred approach. For example, in China, students still rely heavily on
classroom teaching and on teachers in their pursuit of knowledge, and they lack autonomy
in making self-study plans (Li, 2018; Wang, 2010). Evidence from the Republic of Ireland
reveals operational challenges around the need for infrastructure development and invest-
ment, teacher training in ICT competency, difficulty finding adequate technical support and,
in some schools, the unavailability of Wi-Fi, and slow computers (Alghamdi & Holland, 2020;
Cosgrove et al., 2019). It has been recognised that there is a need for more cross-cultural
study of technology integration in order to identify whether cultural differences in teachers’
knowledge can affect performance in the flipped learning environment. By providing infor-
mation from a comparatively under-researched context, the present study contributes to our
understanding of intercultural similarities and differences with the possibility of the transfer
of insights to contexts where similar pedagogical and practical issues are prevalent.
Limitations
The findings presented above must be interpreted in the light of a number of limitations, one
of which being that all of the participating students and teachers were women. Whether we
should expect the impact of FC to differ from that on male students is unclear. Some studies
have shown that the impact of FC, on achievement at least, tends to be greater for female
students (Chiquito et al., 2020; Gross et al., 2015). Other studies have shown no gender
difference in the impact of FC (for example, Chen et al., 2016). Whether our findings can be
generalised to male Saudi students is an important question for future research to address.
Other limitations of the current study might help to explain why the impact of the inter-
vention on algebra proficiency was lower than anticipated. First, the intervention lasted only
six weeks, excluding initial training, which is a short period of time for students to adjust
to a new approach which requires much independence and use of technology (Whillier &
Lystad, 2015); these are considerable changes bearing in mind that traditional teaching in
Saudi Arabia relies heavily on rote learning and memorisation. As suggested by Mason
et al. (2013), FC needs to be implemented for a whole term in order for the full benefit to be
obtained. Future research should aim at a longer intervention.
Each participating teacher had to teach using both FC (in the intervention classroom) and
traditional teaching (for the control classroom). Although this enabled us to minimise teacher
influence in our analysis, it imposed an additional burden on the teachers, which might have
affected the students' performance. Also, Saudi teachers' limited familiarity with the inter-
vention and the technology involved (Alzahrani, 2019) could have exacerbated this negative
effect—teachers' familiarity with a teaching method being an important determinant of stu-
dents' learning and attitudes (Yong et al., 2015). In addition, the fact that the teachers were
teaching in both conditions might have led to contamination of the control group, potentially
reducing the impact of FC in our analyses.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of FC on algebra learning in Saudi
Arabia, a country with low maths achievement and technological limitations. This context dif-
fers markedly from those of most previous evaluations of FC. Despite these new challenges,
the findings of this study show that FC can have a positive impact on students, particularly
on their self-efficacy, suggesting that the teaching method can be beneficial in a range of
contexts.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was funded through a PhD scholarship from the Ministry of Education, Saudi
Arabia.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
D ATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T

Anonymised data and interview transcripts are available on request.
E T H I C S S TAT E M E N T
The study was approved by the University of York Ethics Committee and by the Ministry of
Education in Saudi Arabia. All students and teachers took part in the study voluntarily.
ORCID
Badriah Algarni https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9966-738X
ENDNOTE
1
Effect sizes were computed by dividing the adjusted mean difference (unstandardised beta representing differ-
ence of condition means) by the SD of the outcome computed from raw data (Baguley, 2009).
REFERENCES
Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers
& Education, 126(1), 334–3 45.
Alebaikan, R., & Troudi, S. (2016). Blended learning in Saudi universities: challenges and perspectives. Research
in Learning Technology, 18(1), 49–59.
Algarni, B. (2021). Blended learning and the flipped classroom: The potential effect to enhance students' math-
ematical proficiency and self-efficacy: a mixed methods study from Saudi Arabia Doctoral dissertation.
University of York.
Alghamdi, J., & Holland, C. (2020). A comparative analysis of policies, strategies and programmes for information
and communication technology integration in education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the republic of
Ireland. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 4721–4745.
Alkahtani, A. (2017). The challenges facing the integration of ICT in teaching in Saudi secondary schools.
International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 13(1), 32–51.
Alqurashi, E., Gokbel, E. N., & Carbonara, D. (2017). Teachers' knowledge in content, pedagogy and technology
integration: A comparative analysis between teachers in Saudi Arabia and United States. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 48(6), 1414–1426.
Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2015). From passive to active: the impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms
on higher education students' creative thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1133–1148.
Alzahrani, S. M. (2019). Saudi Arabian high school teachers' understanding and implementation of flipped learning
(Publication No. 27603014). Doctoral dissertation. University of Toledo. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Anderson, L., & Brennan, J. P. (2015). An experiment in "flipped" teaching in freshman calculus. Primus, 25(9–
10), 861–875.
Ayotola, A., & Adedeji, T. (2009). The relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and achievement in mathe-
matics. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 953–957.
Baguley, T. (2009). Standardized or simple effect size: What should be reported? British Journal of Psychology,
100(3), 603–617.
Bakr Khoshaim, H., & Ali, T. (2015). Students' struggle with first-year university mathematics courses in Saudi
Arabia. College Student Journal, 49(4), 588– 598.
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology, 4(3), 359–373.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of
Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–51.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International
Society for Technology in Education.
Bhagat, K. K., Chang, C. N., & Chang, C. Y. (2016). The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept
learning in high school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 134–142.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In Proceedings of the 120th
ASEE National Conference and Exposition (Paper ID 6219). American Society for Engineering Education.
Braun, I., Ritter, S., & Vasko, M. (2014). Inverted classroom by topic—A study in mathematics for electrical engi-
neering students. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 4(3), 11–17.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2),
77–101.
Chen, S. C., Yang, S. J., & Hsiao, C. C. (2016). Exploring student perceptions, learning outcome and gender
differences in a flipped mathematics course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1096–1112.
Chen, Y., Wang, Y., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead?
Computers & Education, 79, 16–27.
Chiquito, M., Castedo, R., Santos, A. P., López, L. M., & Alarcón, C. (2020). Flipped classroom in engineering: The
influence of gender. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 28(1), 80–89.
Cilli-Turner, E. (2015). Measuring learning outcomes and attitudes in a flipped introductory statistics course.
Primus, 25(9–10), 833–8 46.
Clark, K. R. (2015). The effects of the flipped model of instruction on student engagement and performance in the
secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Educators Online, 12(1), 91–115.
Cosgrove, J., Moran, E., Feerick, E., & Duggan, A. (2019). Digital learning framework (DLF) national evaluation:
Starting off Baseline report. Educational Research Centre. http://www.erc.ie/wpcontent/uploads/2020/01/
DLF-national-evaluation-baseline-report.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Cross, A., Bayyapunedi, M., Cutrell, E., Agarwal, A., & Thies, W. (2013). Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference
on Human Factors in Computing Systems. In TypeRighting: Combining the benefits of handwriting and type-
face in online educational videos (pp. 793–796). ACM.
DeSantis, J., Van Curen, R., Putsch, J., & Metzger, J. (2015). Do students learn more from a flip? An exploration
of the efficacy of flipped and traditional lessons. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26(1), 39–63.
Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science,
332(6031), 862– 864.
Ekrem, S., & Recep, C. (2014). Examining preservice EFL teachers' TPACK competencies in Turkey. Journal of
Educators Online, 11, 1–22.
Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A. D., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K. A., Hendel, R. A., Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G.
M. (2002). Immediate feedback assessment technique promotes learning and corrects inaccurate first re-
sponses. Psychological Record, 52(2), 187–201.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers' use of educational technology in US public schools: 2009
(NCES 2010-0 40). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department
of Education.
Gross, D., Pietri, E. S., Anderson, G., Moyano-Camihort, K., & Graham, M. J. (2015). Increased preclass prepa-
ration underlies student outcome improvement in the flipped classroom. CBE –Life Sciences Education,
14(4), 36.
Grypp, L., & Luebeck, J. (2015). Rotating solids and flipping instruction. The Mathematics Teacher, 109(3),
186–193.
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of
MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (pp. 41–50). ACM.
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy/mathematics performance cor-
respondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 261–273.
Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer, & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
Research on Learning and Instruction (pp. 249–271). Routledge.
IEN National Education Portal. (2019). iEN National Education Portal: Mathematics curriculum. Retrieved 15 May
2017, from https://ien.edu.sa/#/courses/1220
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban
university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50.
Kirvan, R., Rakes, C. R., & Zamora, R. (2015). Flipping an algebra classroom: Analyzing, modeling, and solving
systems of linear equations. Computers in the Schools, 32(3– 4), 201–223.
Kitsaki, C. (Ed.). (2011). Teaching and learning in the Arab world. Peter Lang.
Låg, T., & Sæle, R. G. (2019). Does the flipped classroom improve student learning and satisfaction? A systematic
review and meta-analysis. AERA Open, 5(3), 1–17.
Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students' learning
performance in a mathematics course. Computers and Education, 100, 126–140.
Li, Y. (2018). Current problems with the prerequisites for flipped classroom teaching: A case study in a university
in Northwest China. Smart Learning Environments, 5(1), 1–23.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation.
New Directions for Program Evaluation, 30, 73–8 4.
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017a). A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: Possible solu-
tions and recommendations for future research. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning,
12(1), 4.
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017b). Using ‘First Principles of Instruction’ to design secondary school mathematics
FC: the findings of two exploratory studies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 222–236.
Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Chen, G. (2017). Toward a set of design principles for mathematics flipped classrooms: A
synthesis of research in mathematics education. Educational Research Review, 22, 50–73.
Lo, C. K., Lie, C. W., & Hew, K. F. (2018). Applying ‘First Principles of Instruction’ as a design theory of the flipped
classroom: findings from a collective study of four secondary school subjects. Computers and Education,
118, 150–165.
Lopes, A. P., & Soares, F. (2018). Perception and performance in a flipped Financial Mathematics classroom.
International Journal of Management Education, 16(1), 105–113.
Lortie-Forgues, H., & Inglis, M. (2019). Rigorous large-scale educational RCTs are often uninformative: should we
be concerned? Educational Researcher, 48(3), 158–166.
Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. W. (2014). Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear
algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(3), 317–324.
Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2006). Improving self-efficacy and motivation: What to do, what to say. Intervention
in School and Clinic, 41(4), 218–227.
Mason, G. S., Shuman, T. R., & Cook, K. E. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a tra-
ditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430– 435.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning,
41, 31–48.
McShane, B. B., & Böckenholt, U. (2014). You cannot step into the same river twice: When power analyses are
optimistic. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 612– 625.
Melnyk, B. M., & Morrison-Beedy, D. (Eds.). (2018). Intervention research and evidence-based quality improve-
ment: Designing, conducting, analyzing, and funding (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing.
Muir, T., & Geiger, V. (2016). The affordances of using a flipped classroom approach in the teaching of mathematics:
A case study of a grade 10 mathematics class. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(1), 149–171.
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Minnich, C. A., Stanco, G. M., Arora, A., & Centurino, V. A. S. (2012). TIMSS 2011
encyclopedia: Education policy and curriculum in mathematics and science (Vol. 1 and 2). TIMSS & PIRLS
International Study Center, Boston College.
Murphy, J., Chang, J. M., & Suaray, K. (2016). Student performance and attitudes in a collaborative and flipped linear
algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(5), 653–673.
Nurunnabi, M. (2017). Transformation from an oil-based economy to a knowledge-based economy in Saudi
Arabia: The Direction of Saudi Vision 2030. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8(2), 536–564.
OECD. (2018) PISA 2018 results. Retrieved 20 May 2019, from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/pisa-
2018-results.htm#
O'Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The
Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95.
Palmer, K. (2015). Flipping a calculus class: One instructor's experience. Primus, 25(9–10), 886–891.
Rice, W. (2006). Moodle: E-Learning course development: a complete guide to successful learning using Moodle.
Packt Publishing.
Rugh, W. A. (2002). Education in Saudi Arabia: choices and constraints. Middle East Policy, 9(2), 40.
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles
(Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 15–31). Academic Press.
Sénéchal, M., & Young, L. (2008). The effect of family literacy interventions on children's acquisition of reading
from kindergarten to grade 3: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 880–9 07.
Sletten, S. R. (2015). Investigating self-regulated learning strategies in the flipped classroom. In D. Rutledge &
D. Slykhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the SITE 2015-Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
International Conference (pp. 497–501). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Song, Y., Jong, M. S., Chang, M., & Chen, W. (2017). Guest editorial: ‘HOW’ to design, implement and evaluate
the flipped classroom?—A synthesis. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 180–183.
Song, Y., & Kapur, M. (2017). How to flip the classroom—‘productive failure or traditional flipped classroom’ ped-
agogical design? Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 20(1), 292–305.
TIMSS. (2015). TIMSS 2015 International Reports. Retrieved 15 June 2018, from http://timss2015.org/#/?playl
istId= 0&videoId
Turco, T. L., & Elliott, S. N. (1986). Assessment of students' acceptability ratings of teacher-initiated interventions
for classroom misbehavior. Journal of School Psychology, 24(3), 277–283.
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 34(1), 89–101.
Van Sickle, J. (2016). Discrepancies between student perception and achievement of learning outcomes in a
flipped classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 29–38.
Vang, Y. V. (2017). The impact of the flipped classroom on high school mathematics students' academic perfor-
mance and self-efficacy. Doctoral dissertation. California State University.
Wang, J. (2010). How to develop college students' autonomous English learning skills: Take reading course in
joint-program in HCFT as an example. English Language Teaching, 3(3), 221–228.
Wasserman, N. H., Quint, C., Norris, S. A., & Carr, T. (2017). Exploring flipped classroom instruction in Calculus
III. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(3), 545–568.
Whillier, S., & Lystad, R. P. (2015). No differences in grades or level of satisfaction in a flipped classroom for neu-
roanatomy. Journal of Chiropractic Education, 29(2), 127–133.
Wiginton, B. (2013). Flipped instruction: An investigation into the effect of learning environment on student
self-efficacy, learning style, and academic achievement in an algebra I classroom. Doctoral dissertation.
University of Alabama.
Wilson, S. G. (2013). The flipped class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduate statistics course.
Teaching of Psychology, 40(3), 193–199.
Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B.
J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 297–
314). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Yong, D., Levy, R., & Lape, N. (2015). Why no difference? A controlled flipped classroom study for an introductory
differential equations course. Primus, 25(9–10), 907–921.
Yorganci, S. (2020). Implementing flipped learning approach based on ‘first principles of instruction’ in mathemat-
ics courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(5), 763–779.
Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2019). Exploring students' competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped
classroom pedagogical model. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), 115–126.
S U P P O R T I N G I N F O R M AT I O N
Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section
at the end of this article.
How to cite this article: Algarni, B., & Lortie-Forgues, H. (2022). An evaluation of
the impact of flipped-classroom teaching on mathematics proficiency and self-efficacy
in Saudi Arabia. British Journal of Educational Technology, 00, 1–22. https://doi.
org/10.1111/bjet.13250

Students' Perceptions of Creativity in Learning Information Technology (IT) in Project Groups

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Students' Perceptions of Creativity in Learning Information Technology (IT) in Project Groups

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

14678535, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13250 by University of Piraeus, Wiley Online Library on [03/12/2022].

An evaluation of the impact of

Badriah Algarni1 | Hugues Lortie-­Forgues2

© 2022 British Educational Research Association.

Br J Educ Technol. 2022;00:1–22. ﻿ wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bjet | 1

FC I N M ATH E M ATI CS E DUCATI O N

Impact on mathematics achievement

Impact on mathematics self-­efficacy

Another important outcome is self-­efficacy. Self-­efficacy is considered one of the strong-

The flipped mathematics classroom and students' perceptions

Limitations of previous studies of FC

The differences in outcomes reported in studies of FC in mathematics education can be

FC teaching in Saudi Arabia

Context and participants

Procedure and content of the intervention

TA B L E 1 Overview of the participants

Intervention group Control group

School Teacher N of students N of students

Outcome measures comprised pre-­and postmeasures of algebra proficiency, pre-­and

Pre-­ and postintervention algebra proficiency test

Pre-­ and postintervention mathematical self-­efficacy questionnaire

TA B L E 2 Descriptive statistics of the two groups

Students' and teachers' perceptions of the FC

DATA A N A LYS I S PROCE DUR E

TA B L E 3 Comparison of average self-­efficacy score of both groups on pre-­and posttest

TA B L E 4 Descriptive results for students' post-­self-­efficacy by scale

Benefits of in-­class activities

Benefits of out-­of-­class activities

Benefits of the FC in general

Challenges associated with the FC

Perceptions of the intervention

D ATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T

You might also like

Badriah Algarni1 | Hugues Lortie-Forgues2

Br J Educ Technol. 2022;00:1–22. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bjet | 1

Impact on mathematics self-efficacy

Another important outcome is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is considered one of the strong-

Outcome measures comprised pre-and postmeasures of algebra proficiency, pre-and

Pre- and postintervention algebra proficiency test

Pre- and postintervention mathematical self-efficacy questionnaire

TA B L E 3 Comparison of average self-efficacy score of both groups on pre-and posttest

TA B L E 4 Descriptive results for students' post-self-efficacy by scale

Benefits of in-class activities

Benefits of out-of-class activities