Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement

Min Young Doo

doi:10.30935/cedtech/11368

Min Young Doo ¹ ^*

More Detail

CONT ED TECHNOLOGY, Volume 14, Issue 1, Article No: ep331

https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Submitted: 02 July 2021, Published Online: 26 November 2021

OPEN ACCESS 2427 Views 1336 Downloads

Download Full Text (PDF)

Abstract

This study investigated flipped learners’ perceptions, perceived usefulness, intention to register for flipped learning classes, and learning engagement using cluster analysis with a sample of 306 undergraduate students in flipped classes. The students were classified into five clusters based on their level of social influence and cognitive instrumental processes using the technology acceptance model 2. There were significant differences among the five clusters in perceived usefulness, intention to register for flipped learning classes, and learning engagement. The perception of and preference for flipped learning also varied by cluster. The flipped learning feature that most participants commented on was online pre-learning sessions. The advantages of flipped learning that have to do with online pre-learning sessions include facilitating understanding of lectures, providing review opportunities for learning, flexible learning time, and individualized learning. These advantages indicate that providing students with instructionally sound pre-learning sessions leads to successful flipped learning. The research findings also suggest that flipped class instructors and school administrators utilize cluster analysis with meaningful variables to provide students with effective and tailored learning support.

Keywords: flipped learning, perceptions of flipped learning, perceived usefulness, learning engagement, registration intention, cluster analysis

References

Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for ELearning (GETAMEL) by analyzing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036
Agudo-Peregrina, A. F., Hernandez-Garcia, A., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior, and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 301-314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.035
Aldenderfer, M. S., & Balshfield, R. K. (1984). Cluster analysis. Sage publication. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412983648
Al-Samarraie, H., Shamsuddin, A., & Alzahrani, A. I. (2020). A flipped classroom model in higher education: a review of the evidence across disciplines. Educational Technology Research Development, 68(3), 1017-1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09718-8
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Chen Hsieh, J. S., Huang, Y. M., & Wu, W. C. V. (2017). Technological acceptance of LINE in flipped EFL oral training. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 178-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.066
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Flip Learning (2014). Definition of flipped learning. Flip Learning Organization. https://flippedlearning.org/definition-of-flipped-learning
Forsey, M., Low, M., & Glance, D. (2013). Flipping the sociology classroom: Towards a practice of online pedagogy. The Australian Sociological Association, 49(4), 471-485. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783313504059
Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12-17.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Pearson Education.
Goodwin, B., & Miller, K. (2013). Research says /evidence on flipped classrooms is still coming in. Technology-Rich Learning, 70(6), 78-80.
Hao, Y. (2016). Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 82-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.032
He, W., Holton, A., Farkas, G., & Warschauer, M. (2016). The effects of flipped instruction on out-of-class study time, exam performance, and student perceptions. Learning & Instruction, 45, 61-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.07.001
Hwang, G., Yin, C., & Chu, H. (2019). The era of flipped learning: promoting active learning and higher order thinking with innovative flipped learning strategies and supporting systems. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 991-994. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1667150
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon report: 2015 higher education edition. The New Media Consortium.
Koh, J. H. L. (2019). Four pedagogical dimensions for understanding flipped classroom practices in higher education: A systematic review. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 19(4), 14-33. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2019.4.002
Lee, J. & Choi, H. (2019). Rethinking the flipped learning pre-class: Its influence on the success of flipped learning and related factors. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 934-945. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12618
McDonald, K., & Smith, C. M. (2013). The flipped classroom for professional development: Part I. Benefits and strategies. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 44(10), 437-438. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20130925-19
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Mitchell, T. R., & Beach, L. R. (1976). A review of occupational preference and choice research using expectancy theory and decision theory. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 49, 231-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1976.tb00348.x
Ng, E. M. W. (2018). Integrating self-regulation principles with flipped classroom pedagogy for first year university students. Computers & Education, 126, 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.002
Nouri, J. (2016). The flipped classroom: for active, effective and increased learning – especially for low achievers. International Journal Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0032-z
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002
Park, S. Y., Nam, M.W. & Cha. S. B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592-605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x
Pastor, D. A. (2010). Cluster analysis. In G. R. Hancock, & R. O. Muller (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 41-54). Routledge.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Schreiner, L. A., & Louis, M. C. (2011). The engaged learning index: Implications for faculty development. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 22(1), 5-28.
Steen-Utheim, A. T. & Foldnes, N. (2018). A qualitative investigation of student engagement in a flipped classroom. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(3), 307-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1379481
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Wang, K., & Zhu, C. (2019). MOOC-based flipped learning in higher education: Students’ participation, experience and learning performance. International Journal Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0163-0

Citation

Doo, M. Y. (2022). Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Doo, M. Y. (2022). Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Doo MY. Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2022;14(1), ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Doo, Min Young. "Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement". Contemporary Educational Technology 2022 14 no. 1 (2022): ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Doo, Min Young "Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement". Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 14, no. 1, 2022, ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368

Doo MY. Understanding Flipped Learners’ Perceptions, Perceived Usefulness, Registration Intention, and Learning Engagement. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2022;14(1):ep331. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11368