Home⇛Education Review⇛vol. 11 no. 1 (2022)

The Flipped Classroom and Students’ Achievement in Grammar

Rizza B. Feeney | Annabelle A. Gordonas

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Following recent advances in educational technology-integrated learning, language education authorities are becoming more and more interested in the actual implementation of flipped classrooms as cutting-edge strategies. This study investigated the impact of flipped classroom on students’ achievement in grammar of Grade 10 Students of Concordia College for SY 2018 – 2019. Non- equivalent group design, a true – experimental method was employed in this study. The respondents’ average grade in English from the first to the third quarter was considered to establish comparability. Each group took the pretest and posttests. However, only one group employed a flipped classroom as a teaching-learning strategy. Statistical tools employed were Average Weighted Mean (AWM) and T– test. Major findings revealed that the pretest scores of both experimental and control groups were higher than the 50% passing rate. However, the scores were still under the Approaching Proficiency Level based on DepEd Memo No.8 s of 2015. Pretest scores also showed the two groups had almost the same level of grammar proficiency. It was noted that the pretest scores of the control group were higher than the scores of the experimental group. Post test scores of both groups had increased after the intervention which denoted that traditional and flipped classroom were effective in teaching grammar. It also revealed that the experimental group scores were higher than that of the control group. Further, there was no significant difference between the pretest scores of the control and experimental groups. This meant that the control and experimental groups’ achievement in grammar was equal before the implementation of the intervention. The post test scores of the two groups revealed that there was no significant difference between the posttest scores. This indicated that both groups had improved their grammar achievement; however, it would not imply that the achievement of the experimental group is higher than the control group.



References:

  1. Al-Hamlan, S., & Baniabdelrahman, A (2015). A needs analysis approach to efl syllabus development for second grade students in secondary education in saudi arabia: a descriptive analytical approach to students’ needs. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 5(1) 118-145
  2. Al-Harbi, A. H. (2015). A Flipped learning approach using social media in health ınformatics education.Creative Education, 6, 1466-1475. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.613147
  3. Arias, M.B. & Faltis C. (2012).Implementing educational language policy in arizona: legal, historical and current practices in SEI. Great Britain. Short Run Press Ltd., p. 156
  4. Barrot, Jessie (2018): English curriculum reform in the philippines: ıssues and challenges from a 21st century learning perspective, journal of language, ıdentity & education, doı: 10.1080/15348458.2018.1528547
  5. Basal, A. (2015). The Implementation of a flipped classroom ın foreign language teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education . DOI: 10.17718/ tojde.72185
  6. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: reach every student in every class every day. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
  7. Bishop, Jacob Jewell, and Matthew A. Verleger.(2013) “The flipped classroom: A survey of the research.” ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta.
  8. Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning: Theory and practice (pp. 47–63). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston
  9. Brooks, J. G. (2002). Schooling for life: Reclaiming the essence of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
  10. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press
  11. De Jesus, C. (2011. “English proficiency level of English teachers of selected private schools of Tarlac City”, a thesis, Graduate School, Tarlac State University, Tarlac, Philippines
  12. Department of Education. (2013). NAT overview and 2012 test results. Retrieved January 12, 2016 from http://depedqc.ph/announcements/2013-NAT-
  13. Denprapat, O., & Chuaychoowong, M. (2016). Using Flipped Classroom Model to Develop English Competency and Independent Attributes of Mathayom Suksa 1 Students at Mengrai Maharajwitthayakhom School.
  14. Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E, & Allen, D. E. (Eds.). (2001). The power of problem-based learning.Sterling, VA: Stylus
  15. Fikron, M. R. (2018) Grammatical competence within l2 communication: language production, monitor hypothesis, and focus on forms instruction. Pancaran Pendidikan FKIP Universitas Jember, 7, (1),101-112.
  16. Flumerfelt, S. and Green, G. (2013) Using Lean in the Flipped Classroom for at Risk Students. Educational Technology & Society, 16, 356-366.
  17. Fulton, K. (2012b). Upside down and ınside out: flip your classroom to ımprove student learning. learning & leading technology, 39, 12-17. Maharajwitthayakhom School.
  18. Galway, L.P, Corbett,K.K, Tairyan, K & Frank, E ( 2014). A novel integration of online and flipped classroom instrucyional modelsin public health in higher education. BMC Medical Education,14, 181. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-181 .
  19. Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
  20. Howell, D. (2013). Effects of an ınverted ınstructional delivery model on achievement of ninth-grade physical science honors students (Doctoral Dissertation), Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses 360764.
  21. Kang, N. (2015). The comparison between regular and flipped classrooms for efl koreanadult learners. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 41- 72.
  22. Magno, C. (2010). Korean students’ language learning strategies and years of studying English as predictors of proficiency in English. Dela Salle University, Philipines. TESOL Journal Volume 2, pp. 39 – 61.
  23. Moffett, J., & Mill, A.C. (2014) Evaluation of the flipped classroom approach in a veterinary professional skills course Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 5, 415-425. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S70160
  24. Namik, K., Boae, C. and Jeong-Im, C. (2014). A case study of flipped learning at college: focused on effects of motivation and self-efficacy, educational technology, 30(3), 467-492
  25. Nordquist, R. (2017) English as a second language (ESL or TESL). Retrieved from http://www.thought.co.comm-english-as-a-second-language
  26. Rajesh, M. (2015). Revolution in communication technologies: impact on distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 16(1), 62-88.
  27. Roehl, A ( 2013). The flipped classroom: an opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Services, 105 (@), 44 – 49. Retrieved from: http://pearlstkate.edu/login?url=http:search.proquest.com/docview/1426052585/accountid=26879
  28. Tavakoli,M. Dastjerdi, HV, & Esteki, M. (2011). The effect of explicit strategy ınstruction on l2 oral production of ıranian ıntermediate efl learners: focusing on accuracy, fluency and complexity. ISSN 1798-4769 Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 989-997, September 2011 © 2011 Academy Publısher Manufactured in Finland. doi:10.4304/ jltr.2.5.989-997
  29. Tune, J. D., Sturek, M., & Basile, D. P. (2013). Flipped classroom model improves Graduate student performance in cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal physiology. advanced physiology education, 37, 316-320. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00091.2013
  30. White, H. & Sabarwal, S. (2014). Quasi-experimental design and methods, methodological briefs: ımpact evaluation 8. UNICEF Office of Research, Florence
  31. Salman, Z. M., & Hazem, A. H. (2022). The impact of grammatical competence on 1st year university english students’ written performance. ınternational journal of health sciences, 6(S1), 11455–11466. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS1.547

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic