اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 347 |
| تعداد مقالات | 2,870 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 3,261,429 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 2,396,378 |
Evaluating the Impact of a Flipped, a Traditional, and an Online Course on Grammar Knowledge Development and Content Coverage: Flipped Class’s Perception in Focus | ||
| Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 9، شماره 3، مهر 2022، صفحه 101-129 اصل مقاله (2.29 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: research paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jmrels.2022.16282.1970 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Ahmad Khalifeh1؛ Mohammad Bavali* 2؛ Ehsan Rassaei3 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran, | ||
| 2Assistant Professor, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran, | ||
| 3Associate Professor, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran. | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 07 مهر 1400، تاریخ بازنگری: 11 دی 1400، تاریخ پذیرش: 18 دی 1400 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| The integration of technology into education has offered new opportunities for higher education students. Flipped class, as part of this opportunity, has inspired ample research recently. However, there is still controversy over its effectiveness. To shed more light on its potentials, the present study compares a flipped class with a traditional and an online course in terms of their effects on developing the grammar knowledge of Iranian pre-intermediate TEFL students. In addition, the perceptions of the flipped group toward their learning experience in four areas were examined: motivation, effectiveness, interaction, and satisfaction. Finally, the potential of the flipped class to assist the instructor in presenting more topics was evaluated. Fifty-nine freshmen in two different classes were selected. Then, each class was randomly assigned to an experimental (n=31) or a control group (n=28). The former received instruction in a flipped class, whereas the latter attended a traditional class. Afterward, their performance was compared with that of another group attending an online course (n= 25). The data were collected through a timed and an untimed grammaticality judgment test and a perception scale. In order to compare the content coverage in the three classes, the number of units taught in each class was divided by the total number of units assigned for the semester. The results showed that instruction in the flipped class was as effective as instruction in the traditional class and both were more effective than the fully online course. Additionally, the flipped class seemed to be a satisfactory experience for the learners. The results also indicated that drawing on a flipped class can allow the instructor to present more content without compromising the quality of instruction and learning. The results can encourage language teachers, program developers, and educational policymakers to consider the flipped classroom as an acceptable alternative. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Flipped؛ Grammar؛ Online؛ Perception؛ Traditional | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| ارزیابی تأثیر کلاسهای معکوس، سنتی و آنلاین بر افزایش دانش دستور زبان و ارائه محتوا: تمرکز بر ادراک کلاس معکوس | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| احمد خلیفه1؛ محمد بوالی2؛ احسان رسایی3 | ||
| 1دانشجو دکتری ، گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران، | ||
| 2استادیارگروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران، | ||
| 3دانشیار، گروه زبان انگلیسی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران، | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| ادغام فناوری در آموزش فرصت های جدیدی را برای یادگیری فراهم نموده است. کلاس معکوس، به عنوان بخشی از این فرصت، اخیراً الهام‌بخش تحقیقات فراوانی شده است. با این حال، همچنان در مورد اثربخشی آن اختلاف نظرهایی وجود دارد. برای روشن شدن بیشتر پتانسیل‌های آن، مطالعه حاضر یک کلاس معکوس را با کلاسی سنتی و آنلاین از لحاظ تأثیر آنها بر افزایش دانش دستور زبان دانشجویان ایرانی مقایسه می‌کند. علاوه بر این، ادراک گروه کلاس معکوس نسبت به تجربه یادگیری خود در چهار حوزه انگیزه، اثربخشی، تعامل و رضایت مورد بررسی قرار می گیرد. در نهایت، پتانسیل کلاس معکوس برای کمک به مدرس درارائه مطالب بیشتر ارزیابی گردید. 59 دانشجوی سال اول رشته آموزش زبان انگلیسی در دو کلاس مختلف انتخاب شدند. سپس به طور تصادفی هر کلاس به عنوان یک گروه آزمایشی (31 نفر) یا شاهد (28 نفر) در نظر گرفته شد . گروه آزمایشی در یک کلاس معکوس و گروه شاهد در کلاسی سنتی آموزش دریافت نمودند. سپس، عملکرد آنها با گروه دیگری که در کلاسی آنلاین (25 نفر) آموزش دیده بودند مقایسه گردید. نتایج نشان داد که آموزش در کلاس معکوس به اندازه آموزش در کلاس سنتی موثر بوده و هر دو از کلاس آنلاین موثرتر بوده اند. همچنین به نظر می رسد که کلاس معکوس برای دانشجویان تجربه ای رضایت بخش بوده است. نتایج همچنین نشان داد که کلاس معکوس می تواند به مدرسان این امکان را بدهد که مطالب بیشتری را بدون کاهش کیفیت آموزش و یادگیری طی یک ترم تحصیلی تدریس نمایند. نتایج بدست آمده می تواند معلمان زبان ، طراحان و سیاست گذاران آموزشی را تشویق نماید که کلاس معکوس را به عنوان جایگزینی قابل قبول در نظر بگیرند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| کلاس معکوس, دستور زبان, آنلاین, ادراک, سنتی | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
References
Asaka, S., Shinozaki, F., & Yoshida, H. (2018). The effect of flipped classroom approach on EFL Japanese junior high school students’ performances and attitudes. International Journal of Heritage, Art, and Multimedia, 1(3), 71-87.
Azizi, M. (2020). Online EAP courses amid COVID-19: On the effectiveness of the vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension components. Issues in Language Teaching, 9(2), 219-244.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Bezzazi, R. (2019). Learning English grammar through flipped learning. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 170-184.
Bland, L. (2006, June). Applying flip/inverted classroom model in electrical engineering to establish lifelong learning [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, Chicago, IL.
Bote-Lorenzo, M. L., & Gómez-Sánchez, E. (2017). Predicting the decrease of engagement indicators in a MOOC. In M. Hatala (Ed.), Proceedings of the seventh international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 143–147). ACM Press.
Bulut, C., & Kocoglu, Z. (2020). The flipped classroom's effect on EFL learners' grammar knowledge. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 12(4), 69-84.
Burgess, J., & Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form: Explicit or implicit? System, 30(4), 433-458.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Chen Hsieh, J. S., Wu, W.-C. V., & Marek, M. W. (2017). Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1–2), 1-21.
Chen, L.-L. (2016). Impacts of flipped classroom in high school health education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44(4), 41-420.
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.
Clark, R. E. (Ed.). (2012). Learning from media: Arguments, analysis, and evidence (2nd ed.). Information Age Publishing.
Fauzan, A., & Ngabut, M. N. (2018). EFL students’ perception on flipped learning in writing class. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 8(2), 115-129.
Fischer, C., Xu, D., Rodriguez, F., Denaro, K., & Warschauer, M. (2020). Effects of course modality in summer session: Enrollment patterns and student performance in face-to-face and online classes. The Internet and Higher Education, 45, 1-9.
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2007). Quality in blended learning: Exploring the relationships between online and face-to-face teaching and learning. Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 53-64.
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2009). Evaluating the quality of e-learning at the degree level in the student experience of blended learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 652-663.
Hsieh, T-L (2014) Motivation matters? The relationship among different types of learning motivation, engagement behaviors and learning outcomes of undergraduate students in Taiwan. Higher Education, 68(3), 417-433.
Hung, H-T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
Jafarigohar, M., Khoshsima, H., Haghighi, H., & Vahdany, F. (2019). Incorporation of flipped learning into EFL classrooms: Performance and perception. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(3), 1-14.
Kang, N. (2015). The comparison between regular and flipped classrooms for EFL Korean adult learners. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning 18, 41-72.
Khodabandeh, F., & Tahririan, M. H. (2020). Exploring the impact of blended, flipped, and traditional teaching strategies for teaching grammar on Iranian EFL learners’ through English newspaper articles. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 39, 89-129.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching 41(1), 30-35.
Lee, G., & Wallace, A. (2018). Flipped learning in the English as a foreign language classroom: Outcomes and perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 52(1), 62-84.
Littlewood, W. (2011). Communicative language teaching: An expanding concept for a changing world. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 541-557). Routledge.
Liu, C., Sands-Meyer, S., & Audran, J. (2019). The effectiveness of the student response system (SRS) in English grammar learning in a flipped English as a foreign language (EFL) class. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1178-1191.
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2020). A comparison of flipped learning with gamification, traditional learning, and online independent study: The effects on students’ mathematics achievement and cognitive engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 464-481.
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Native Language and Foreign Language Acquisition, 379(1), 259-278.
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382-385.
Mason, G. S., Shuman, T. R., & Cook, K. E. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper‐division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430-435.
McLaughlin, E. J. (2018). Flipped classrooms, by design. Medical Education, 52 (9), 887-888.
McLaughlin, P., O’Malley, C., & Porcaro, P. (2017). Inclusive STEM: Closing the learning loop. In C., Reidsema, L., Kavanagh, R., Hadgraft, & N., Smith (Eds), The flipped classroom: Practice and practices in higher education (pp.151-161). Springer.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R.F., & Baki, M. (2013). The Effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1-47.
Meltem, E. (2015). The effectiveness of blended learning environments, Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 8(4), 251-256.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction, American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view. Thomson Wadsworth.
Noroozi, A., Rezvani, E., & Ameri-Golestan, A. (2020). The effect of flipped classrooms on L2 learners' development and retention of grammatical knowledge. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(4), 14-30.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.
O'Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25(1), 85-95.
Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38-46.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. Jossey-Bass.
Park, H. S. (2008). The effects of shared cognition on group satisfaction and performance: Politeness and efficiency in group interaction. Communication Research, 35(1), 88-108.
Pavanelli, R. (2018). The flipped classroom: A mixed methods study of academic performance and student perception in EAP writing context. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 5(2), 16-26.
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in nursing & health, 30(4), 459-467.
Roehling, P. V. (2018). Flipping the college classroom: An evidence-based guide. Palgrave.
Schultz, D., Duffield, S., Rasmussen, S. C., & Wageman, J. (2014). Effects of the flipped classroom model on student performance for advanced placement high school chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(9), 1334-133.
Sergis, S., Sampson, D. G., & Pelliccione, L. (2018). Investigating the impact of flipped classroom on students’ learning experiences: A self-determination theory approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 368-378.
Shachar M., & Neumann, Y., (2010). Twenty years of research on the academic performance differences between traditional and distance learning: Summative meta-analysis and trend examination. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6 (2), 318-334.
Shotaro, A., Fumiya, S., & Haruya, Y. (2018). The effect of a flipped classroom approach on EFL Japanese junior high school students’ performances and attitudes. International Journal of Heritage, Art and Multimedia, 1(3), 71-87.
Strohmyer, D. (2016). Student perceptions of flipped learning in a high school math classroom. [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/2178
Teng, M. F. (2018). Flip your classroom to improve EFL students’ speaking skills. In J., Mehring & A., Leis (Eds.), Innovations in flipping the language classroom (pp.113–122). Springer.
Tully, D. (2014). The effects of a flipped learning model utilizing varied technology verses the traditional learning model in a high school biology classroom [Master’s thesis, Montana State University]. https://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/handle/1/3600
Turner, M. J., & Webster, R. D. (2017). A comparison of delivery formats to encourage student-centered learning in a power engineering technology course. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 8(2), 141-156.
Ushida, E. (2005). The role of students' attitudes and motivation in second language learning in online language courses. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 49-78.
Vaezi, R., Afghari, A., & Lotfi, A. (2019). Flipped teaching: Iranian students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Applied Research on English Language, 8(1), 139-164.
van Alten, D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester, L. (2019). Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, 1-18.
van Weele, C. (2020, February 5). Opinion: Online classes are not effective in educating students. The Daily Aztec.
Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81-94.
Vitta, J. P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2020). The flipped classroom in second language learning: A meta-analysis, Language Teaching Research, 24, 1-25.
Wang, J., An, N., & Wright, C. (2018). Enhancing beginner learners’ oral proficiency in a flipped Chinese foreign language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning 31(5-6), 490-521.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers and Education, 55(1), 155-164.
Yelamarthi, K., & Drake, E. (2015). A flipped first year digital circuits course for engineering and technology students. IEEE Transactions on Education, 58(3), 179-186.
Zhu, C., (2017). University student satisfaction and perceived effectiveness of a blended learning course. International Journal of Learning Technology, 12(1), 66-83.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 586 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 306 |
||