Master’s Thesis

Merits of the Flipped Classroom Distance-students’ perception of usefulness and challenges regarding the flipped classroom concept in higher education

Author: Kevin Fuchs Supervisor: Nam Aghaee Examiner: Associate Professor Päivi Jokela Date: 27th May 2020 Course Code: 4IK50E, 15 credits Subject: Information Systems Level: Graduate Department of Informatics

Abstract The educational sector was transforming, wherein distance learning was considered a contemporary alternative to the campus-based learning approach. The flipped classroom concept was a well-researched method that could be applied within the distance-learning paradigm. There were claims that suggest a variety of advantages, however, available publications were lacking the perspective of the primary beneficiary: the students. On this basis, the research question was formulated how distance-students in higher education perceive the benefits and challenges with the technology-enhanced flipped classroom concept. The research was purposefully designed to build on existing contemporary knowledge claims. The review originated from a holistic review of the flipped classroom concept down to well-established educational theories that were connected to contemporary learning methods within the field of Informatics. The empirical data for this qualitative research was collected through seven semi-structured interviews that were preceded by a preliminary observational study. By the means of a thematic analysis, three major themes were identified that offered a broader insight into the students' perspective with regards to the benefits and challenges of the flipped classroom concept. Namely, these themes were (1) sentimental involvement, (2) flipped classroom design, and (3) participants’ perception. The findings revealed that the discussion-based sessions assisted them to foster the knowledge transfer. Furthermore, the ability to contribute and influence the discussion had been perceived as positive. The results of this research confirmed earlier claims concerning a positive perception of the flipped classroom concept. Current scientific publications already argued the importance of student-centered education as a method to develop competencies of students and improve the knowledge transfer of the course participants. This research discovered that the flipped classroom concept was a viable tool to further empower students and facilitate constructivism through communication and enhancement of cognitivism. Keywords: Flipped Classroom, Educational Technology, Distance Learning, Connectivism

I

Foreword & Acknowledgements

Foreword For the most part, I have worked on this research project during the novel Coronavirus pandemic that started to affect the region where I resided in early February 2020. The surging numbers of cases accelerated countermeasures that resulted in isolation and lockdown of the region, which ultimately led to social distancing. My worries to maintain my drive and motivation to achieve outstanding research were quickly replaced by thankfulness to conduct this research project, as it allowed me to keep my sanity during this truly exceptional time. I am very thankful for all the encouraging discussions that I had with the various stakeholders.

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky"

- Michael Scott

Acknowledgements Particularly, I would like to extend my deepest appreciation to my thesis supervisor, Nam Aghaee. You have been an inspiration, motivator, and teacher throughout the entire process and I am thankful for the time and hard work you dedicated to me. Additionally, I would like to thank Professor Anita Mirijamdotter and Associate Professor Päivi Jokela for their constructive feedback during the seminars. Your experience, suggestions, and guidance allowed me to improve my research and become a more versatile researcher myself. Last but not least, I would like to thank the participants of my study for their time and valuable contribution. I completely understand how busy you were and that you had plenty of other tasks to work on, therefore I am very grateful that you made the time to attend to my research project and shared your valuable insights - even though I can not mention you personally for confidentiality reasons, but I am thankful for your help and contribution to this research study.

II

List of Tables, Figures and Abbreviations

Tables Page Table 1. Criteria that was used for the inclusion and exclusion of literature......................... 7 Table 2. Features associated with instructivism educational theory...................................... 8 Table 3. Features associated with constructivism educational theory................................... 9 Table 4. Comparison of Instructivism vs. Constructivism characteristics............................. 10 Table 5. Amount of publications per year connected to flipped classrooms......................... 15 Table 6. Characteristics of qualitative- and quantitative research approach.......................... 20 Table 7. Demographics of the interview participants............................................................ 27 Table 8. Sentiment between FC and traditional classroom by the participants..................... 29 Table 9. Summary of the relationship between themes, subthemes and coded findings....... 37 Table 10. Summary of empirical findings referenced with relevant publications................. 38

Figures Page Figure 1. Suggested structure for a research.......................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Thesis organization and interconnection of all chapters........................................ 5 Figure 3. Individual steps when reviewing scientific literature............................................. 6 Figure 4. The hierarchical construct of constructivism educational theories........................ 12 Figure 5. Theoretical design approach for a flipped classroom............................................. 16 Figure 6. Hierarchical view of applied top-down approach for literature review.................. 17 Figure 7. Relationship between Ontology, Epistemology and the Paradigms....................... 18 Figure 8. Six individual phases of thematic analysis............................................................. 24 Figure 9. Interviewees’ participation level during the discussion of the FC......................... 28 Figure 10. Hierarchical perspective how findings were categorized..................................... 36 Figure 11. Visualization of communication patterns in the flipped classroom..................... 40 Figure 12. Usage of ICT in the flipped classroom................................................................. 42 Figure 13. Simplified conceptual model of the FC................................................................ 43

Abbreviations Abbreviations Definitions ICT Information and Communication Technology LMS Learning Management System FC Flipped Classroom IS Information Systems

III

Table of Contents Abstract..................................................................................................................................... I Foreword & Acknowledgements............................................................................................ II List of Tables, Figures and Abbreviations............................................................................. III

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Introduction and Research Setting ......................................................................................... 1 1.2. Purpose Statement and Research Question ............................................................................ 2 1.3. Topic Justification .................................................................................................................. 3 1.4. Scope and Limitations ........................................................................................................... 4 1.5. Thesis Organization ............................................................................................................... 4

2. Review of the Literature ............................................................................................................. 6 2.1. Review Process and Inclusion Criteria .................................................................................. 6 2.2. Educational Theories: Instructivism vs. Constructivism ....................................................... 7 2.3. Cognitive Constructivism and Social Constructivism ......................................................... 11 2.4. Constructivism: Distance Learning and Connectivism ....................................................... 13 2.5. The Flipped Classroom ........................................................................................................ 14 2.6. Summary of the Review ...................................................................................................... 17

3. Research Design ........................................................................................................................ 18 3.1. Methodological Tradition .................................................................................................... 18 3.2. Methodological Approach ................................................................................................... 19 3.3. Method for Data Collection ................................................................................................. 22 3.4. Method for Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 23 3.5. Reliability and Validity ........................................................................................................ 25 3.6. Ethical Considerations ......................................................................................................... 26

4. Empirical Findings and Analysis ............................................................................................. 27 4.1. Demographic Profile ............................................................................................................ 27 4.2. Sentiment Discoveries ......................................................................................................... 28 4.3. Descriptive design of the Flipped Classroom ...................................................................... 30 4.4. Participants perception of the Flipped Classroom ............................................................... 31 4.5. In-class discussion as an accelerator for knowledge transfer .............................................. 35

5. Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 38 5.1. Introduction to the discussion .............................................................................................. 38 5.2. Sentimental Involvement ..................................................................................................... 39 5.3. Flipped Classroom Design ................................................................................................... 39 5.4. Communication .................................................................................................................... 40 5.5. Technology .......................................................................................................................... 41 5.6. Learning Experience ............................................................................................................ 42 5.7. Students’ positive perception with initial barriers ............................................................... 43

6. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 44 6.1. Conclusions and Contributions ............................................................................................ 44 6.2. Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................... 45

References ...................................................................................................................................... 46

Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix 1. An example how the literature was analyzed in the review process ...................... 49 Appendix 2. Interview questionnaire and Informed Consent for the participants ...................... 50

1

1. Introduction This chapter thoroughly introduces the background and setting of the chosen research, elaborate on the purpose statement and research question, justification for the chosen research topic, present the scope and limitations as well as outline the remaining structure of the thesis. 1.1. Introduction and Research Setting Higher education institutions continuously face the challenging task to balance between providing educational excellence in their degree programs and courses respectively, while at the same time handling an increased volume of students in their classrooms (Olaniyi, 2020). Olaniyi (2020) further argued that the imbalanced distribution between lecturers and students resulted in unsatisfactory personal learning outcomes and unengaged students and lecturers, which was supported by an earlier claim from Kim, Kim, Khera and Getman (2014). In addition to an increased amount of students in a classroom, the educational sector was transforming, wherein traditional lecturing was considered outdated and transformational methods in the discipline of distance learning became the new norm in higher education (Bond, Buntins, Bedenlier, Zawacki-Richter and Kerres, 2020). The claim was further supported by O'Flaherty and Phillips (2015) who stated that there was increased pressure for higher educational institutions to transform in order to cope with the increased amount of students while providing a makeover on the methods how content is taught and delivered to meet current conceptual demands (Thai, De Wever and Valcke, 2017). A potential way to handle the aggregated influx of students as well as deliver a contemporary method to lecture students was the flipped classroom concept (Melzer, 2019). The concept innovated the conventional classroom experience, wherein traditionally a lecturer delivers the content to the students who take notes during class and the lecture is adjourned with the task to apply the newly gained knowledge through their homework. This simplified description of a traditional teaching method is claimed outdated (Bond et al., 2020) and disengaging towards students and teachers alike (Melzer, 2019). Nowadays the flipped classroom concept can be applied in order to transform and innovate at which point the student is tasked to watch an online tutorial ahead of the physical in-class lecture in order to gain a fundamental knowledge base. The student takes that acquired knowledge to the physical classroom in order to participate in an active and engaging discussion on the subject (Thai et al., 2017). The flipped classroom concept itself is not new, however, with the advancement of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and the urgent desire to transform educational methods in higher education, it is claimed that the flipped classroom concept has several advantages that meet today’s demands and offer ways to improve the engagement level of students and affect the learning outcomes of the participants and therefore contribute towards an improved overall learning experience (Melzer, 2019; Olaniyi, 2020). Linnaeus University takes already advantage of the flipped classroom concept for some of their courses at the Faculty of Technology at their Växjö campus in the Informatics department. The objective of this thesis was to collect qualitative data from distance-students that participated in flipped classroom courses at Linnaeus University within the Department of Informatics and analyze their perception towards this teaching concept compared to traditional learning methods. The results of this study aim to close a knowledge gap in order to further improve the flipped classroom concept and learning experience for future students.

2

1.2. Purpose Statement and Research Question The purpose of this paper was to examine how do distance-students perceived the flipped classroom concept as part of their educational journey as opposed to the traditional classroom teaching method. It was argued that the focus in higher education was shifting from the teacher’s knowledge towards active participation and engagement of the student to foster the development of their competencies and allowing them to excel in their respective educational path (Lundin, Rensfeldt, Hillman, Lantz-Andersson and Peterson, 2018). Transformational learning concepts such as peer-lecturing or inquiry-based learning have become the new norm in the distance-learning environment and it has been a step towards reaching the goal of student participation and engagement in higher education by shifting away from lecture-based teaching (Majchrzak, Markus and Wareham, 2016). Furthermore, these concepts utilized a variety of different methods that supported the underlying learning objectives of the student, whereas the flipped classroom concept started to get more traction in higher education institutions based on its merits to improve the learning outcomes for students by increasing active participation and engagement (Lundin et al., 2018; Olaniyi, 2020). The flipped classroom concept was a viable alternative for higher educational institutions like Linnaeus University to address the challenge of an increased number of students in a classroom. While simultaneously focusing on the demand to transform the methods of how education was relayed to the students; therefore this study aimed to outline the particular advantages and disadvantages of flipped classrooms at Linnaeus University. On this basis the following research question can be stated:

How do distance-students in higher education perceive benefits and challenges with the technology-enhanced flipped classroom concept as part of their educational journey as opposed to the traditional classroom teaching method?

To adequately answer the preceding research question, there was a need to discuss the educational theories that provide context and set the base framework in order to systematically move from different interpretations of these theories towards different teaching methods, which include the flipped classroom concept. Besides learning theory, learning outcome, the teachers’ role as well as students’ role, the flipped classroom concept and design was discussed and analyzed meticulously in order to build an extensive basis for the research. The research will use the qualitative approach with the strategy of inquiry to conduct semi-structured interviews. The interviews were preceded by a non-participant observation in order to determine relevant and purposeful questions for the qualitative data collection. Answering the previously stated research question allowed to close an identified knowledge gap in the field of informatics as presently there were scientific publications available pertaining to the advantages and disadvantages of flipped classrooms in different educational institutions. However there was a lack of relevant information on how students perceive the usefulness and challenges of this teaching method. Furthermore, the thesis addressed the outlined challenges that higher educational institutions were currently opposed to with regards to transforming their teaching concepts concerning how education was delivered to their students. Furthermore, altering and improving the methods that aim to build and transfer the knowledge, while at the same time managing an increased amount of students in their degree programs and classrooms.

3

1.3. Topic Justification It is widely recognized that the relevance of educational transformation is imminent and that flipped classrooms can offer a partial solution towards the challenging task to provide quality education while trying to cope with the increased amount of students that attend these courses (Kim et al., 2014; Olaniyi, 2020). Furthermore, Kim et al. (2014) claimed that flipped classrooms offer the benefit of higher engagement levels and the major advantage that resources can be optimized and better allocated to tackle the arising issue of larger classrooms and transforming educational needs, which is further supported by the claim of Bond et al. (2020). However, Kim et al. (2014) also addressed that most of the existing studies have additional calls for research, which is one of the primary drivers for this research project to close an identified knowledge gap with regards to the perception of flipped classrooms. In a separate, but relatable study regarding the effectiveness of flipped classrooms, Abeysekera and Dawson (2015) support the earlier statement that traditional learning is passive and not contemporary enough to address current educational needs. Furthermore it does not foster the development of competencies. One of the main advantages with regards to the flipped classroom is that it improves student engagement levels even in large-scale classrooms (Abeysekera et al., 2015; Olaniyi, 2020). This degree project and the subsequent research is also significant because it will provide additional viewpoints on the flipped classroom concept from active participants that are on the receiving end of this educational method. It is argued that higher educational institutions’ continue to struggle in an effort to engage a majority of students and consequently, the students fail to develop sufficiently their competencies that are critical upon graduation (McLaughlin, Roth, Glatt, Gharkholonarehe, Davidson, Griffin, Esserman and Mumper, 2014; Li, Lai and Szeto, 2019). McLaughlin et al. (2014) claimed that namely, critical thinking, complex reasoning skills as well as written communication were at the core of most underdeveloped competences in higher educational institutions, which according to Li et al. (2019) was still a valid claim. Given there are advantages that the flipped classroom concept can contribute in an effort to enhance student engagement and respectively improve the learning outcomes, while simultaneously managing the increased amount of students in a classroom (Bishop and Verleger, 2013; Zainuddin and Perera, 2019). In addition to the anticipated benefits by applying the flipped classroom concept, the underlying methods were examined by Davies, Dean and Ball (2013) with the objective to identify how Information and Communication Technology can contribute in a learning effort. Furthermore, Davies et al. (2013) claim that a technology-enhanced flipped classroom facilitates a better learning approach and that students acknowledged this approach as more engaging compared to a traditional learning environment, which was further supported by Majchrzak et al. (2016). Suhre, Winnips, de Boer, Valdivia and Beldhuis (2019) claimed that flipped classroom lecturers concur that the instructional videos that precede the physical contact class are not the differentiating factor on their own, but rather how they are integrated into the overall approach and concept of the flipped classroom course. This poses the question as to what a suitable approach would be with regards to flipped classrooms. Drawing back to the justification of this study linked with the claims by Davies, Dean and Ball (2013) as well as Zainuddin and Perera (2019), it is important to collect more qualitative data and analyze how students perceive the usefulness and possible challenges of flipped classrooms in order to complement the existing knowledge about the teachers’ perspective on this topic.

4

1.4. Scope and Limitations The scope and limitation of this research project are to examine the perception of distance-students in higher education with regards to the flipped classroom concept. The qualitative data for this research is collected from active distance-students that are enrolled at Linnaeus University. These students were enrolled at the Växjö campus, in a second-cycle degree program at the Faculty of Technology within the Department of Informatics. The academic year corresponding to the data collection was 2019/2020 and the scope of this study is limited to these parameters and the collected data is representative for the aforementioned group of participants. Further limitations might be added in the subsequent chapters based on the analysis of the collected data. 1.5. Thesis Organization This subchapter will elaborate on how the remainder of the degree project is organized and structured. The following structure was adapted based on the recommendations and claims made by Creswell and Creswell (2017) as seen in Figure 1 below. Figure 1. Suggested structure for a research (adapted from Creswell and Creswell, 2017) Generally, the research is divided into six separate chapters, wherein the current chapter aims to provide context to the reader with regards to the background, research objective, topic justification, scope and limitations of the study. The following chapter will extensively address the review of the literature, whereas initially the review process will be introduced and the inclusion criteria were justified. Thereafter, the literature review is built top-down to firstly elaborate high-level educational theories, its subsequent layers before extensively discussing the flipped classroom concept, design and associated advantages and disadvantages of flipped classrooms. The chapter will be concluded with a brief summary of the respective subchapters to highlight key information. The third chapter of this report will introduce the research design, which aims to cover methodological traditions, -approach as well as methods for data collection and analysis. Beyond the introduction, the author will also provide justification why the chosen methods are deemed relevant for this research project. The fourth and fifth chapters will include an extensive discussion of the collected data through thematic analysis; its findings and the corresponding results will be presented in a systematic order. Before the degree project is concluded with the final chapter, which includes the conclusion of the project, how the research contributed with regards to advancing knowledge as well as any future calls for

Research Project

Chapter I Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV + V

Chapter VI

Conclusion Findings & Discussion

Methodological Design

Literature Review Introduction

5

research that are the result of this study. Lastly, any cited publications that were marked as an in-text reference in this paper is mentioned in the bibliography, which is sorted in alphabetical order and subsequent to the sixth chapter of this paper. Based on the introduction of the individual chapters, the interconnectivity of each chapter will be presented as visualized in Figure 2 below.

Chapter 1

Introduction

Chapter 2 Chapter 2

ReviewoftheLiterature TheoreticalFramework

Chapter 3

ResearchDesign

Chapter 5 Chapter 4

Discussions EmpiricalFindings

Chapter 6

Conclusion Figure 2. Thesis organization and interconnection of all chapters (based on thesis structure) The first chapter that includes the introduction lays the groundwork for the degree project. The introduction leads directly to the review of the literature and theoretical framework, which are both covered in the second chapter. Additionally, the introduction has a direct link to the sixth and final chapter. The final chapter will draw back the link to the established research space in the introduction and aims to answer the initial research question. Furthermore, the second chapter leads to the research design, which is covered in the third chapter of this study. The third research design leads to the empirical findings covered in the fourth chapter, which translates to the discussion through the means of thematic analysis. The discussion links back to the review of the literature as it seeks to connect the analyzed findings with the relevant literature before moving towards the last chapter that contains the conclusion of the research project.

6

2. Review of the Literature This chapter will discuss different educational theories and the argued perspectives, which ultimately lead to the flipped classroom concept and then link back to the educational theory. Furthermore, the chapter will discuss critically the current practice in order to establish a reliable and versatile research space. The chapter is concluded with a summary that outlines the key facts with regards to the entire discussion leading from main education theories down to the flipped classroom concept. 2.1. Review Process and Inclusion Criteria This subchapter will chronologically explain the authors’ review process of the literature and what criteria were used for the inclusion and exclusion as well as the elaborate the process in order to demonstrate that the established theoretical framework for this degree project is reliable while providing a versatile insight into existing knowledge claims with regards to flipped classrooms. As part of the review process, the author decisively chose to follow the suggested review process by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff (2003) that entails four individual steps in order to conduct a review of respective literature for the inclusion in a research paper. The individual steps as seen in Figure 3 below can be referred to as identification, screening, eligibility and finally inclusion. Wee and Banister (2016) as well as Hart (2018) support the original claim and further argue that it is still a contemporary review method for literature.

Figure 3. Individual steps when reviewing scientific literature (adapted from Podakoff et al., 2003; Wee et al. 2016; Hart, 2018) The author chose to work with the scientific database Scopus, which contains a large variety of peer-reviewed publications in the field of Informatics and he decisively chose to delimit the academic sources to three types of publications in order to build a reliable pool of information. In order to be deemed eligible for this review of the literature and subsequent discussion, the publication needs to be a journal article, conference paper, or educational book in order to provide the best possible quality of existing research for the following review. The first step of the review is referring to identification, which means to inquire for relevant publications in the Scopus database by using relevant search terms. The author chose to delimit the search parameters that contain “flipped classroom” and “educational theory”. The former term refers to the research topic, while the latter term is referring to educational theory in order to build a base for the subsequent literature review and discussion. In the second step, the corresponding results in Scopus were screened, which meant to read the title of the publication and decide if it is relevant for the literature review or not. Eligibility as the third step is referring to screening the abstract of the publications that were selected in the previous step and if deemed relevant, they were selected for the fourth and

7

final step: inclusion. The final step meant that a full review of the paper was conducted upon which publications were either deemed relevant and were included or deemed not relevant and were excluded. For included articles, an analysis of the used methods, discussion, and conclusion was conducted. A sample of the literature review analysis is shown in Appendix 1. In addition to the four steps, the author purposefully applied inclusion and exclusion criteria in order to limit the list of available literature to relevant publications. Therefore only articles that were published in the English language were deemed eligible and other languages were excluded by default. Additionally, for the search term “flipped classroom”, only publications in the last eight years were considered relevant and older publications were excluded by default. For the educational theories, older publications were used when the original theory is still deemed accurate. If the original theory has evolved or was altered through reliable claims, the subsequent newer claim was added in support of the original claim for the theory. Table 1. Criteria that was used for the inclusion and exclusion of literature (based on Meline, 2006 and Hart, 2018) Inclusion Exclusion Scopus database - Search terms "flipped classroom" or "educational theory" in article title, abstract or keyword

-

Publications with the term "flipped classroom" 2010 or newer

Publication with the term "flipped classroom" 2009 or older

Publications with the term "educational theory" 2019 or older

-

English language Other languages than English Journal, conference paper or book Other types of publications Based on the application of the four steps by Podsakoff, et al. (2003; Wee et al., 2016; Hart, 2018) in conjunction with the inclusion and exclusion criteria that is shown in Table 1 above, the initial search inquiry was limited from 5,851 publications to 43 publications that were ultimately analyzed and included in this literature review. 2.2. Educational Theories: Instructivism vs. Constructivism In order to get a better grasp of the flipped classroom concept and its role in higher education, it is important to provide a hierarchical top-down definition of how flipped classrooms fit into the existing educational theory. Therefore, this subchapter will extensively discuss established educational theories and how the flipped classroom concept fits into the scheme of these educational theories respectively. In the field of education, instructivism and constructivism are two highly regarded and often cited theories that describe two different philosophies on how knowledge is supposed to be relayed to students. The underlying concepts behind the respective theories are fundamentally different, wherein instructivism is rather teacher-focused and constructivism is mainly student-centered (Bain, 2003). It is claimed that instructivism and constructivism can be further sub-classified into behaviorism and cognitivism for the instructivism theory and constructivism and connectivism for the constructivism theory as also visualized in Table 2.

8

As stated, the theories associated with instructivism rely on a teacher-focused form of education and accordingly the student becomes the passive recipient of the teachers’ instructions (Steffe and Gale, 1995). Similarly, the role of the teacher is interpreted correspondingly, whereas the lecturer leads the content and narrative of each class actively (Bain, 2003; Piskunova, Starostova and Yankov, 2018). Moreover, the learning outcomes for both theories have similar aims that strive to transfer the structure of the world onto the learner for both behaviorism as well as cognitivism within the instructivism paradigm (Piskunova et al., 2018). While the learning outcomes are intended to be effective and efficient for knowledge transfer in both theoretical models the learning theory differs between the two models. Behaviorism claims that the link between stimuli and response lead to new knowledge or changed knowledge for the affected person (Steffe and Gale, 1995), while it is argued for the cognitivism theory that processing of received information and linking it back to already existing knowledge of the individual (Piskunova et al., 2018) as also summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Features associated with instructivism educational theory (cited from Steffe and Gale, 1995; Bain, 2003; Piskunova et al., 2018) Educational Theory

Sub-classification

Learning Theory

Learning Outcomes

Teacher’s role

Student’s role

Instructivism Behaviorism Link between stimuli and response lead to new knowledge or changed knowledge

Mapping the structure of the world onto the learner; effective and efficient knowledge transfer

Center of instruction with full control of the narrative and process

Passive recipient of teachers’ instructions

Cognitivism Processing of received information and linking to already existing knowledge

Mapping the structure of the world onto the learner; effective and efficient knowledge transfer

Center of instruction with full control of the narrative and process

Passive recipient of teachers’ instructions

The characteristics of both theories can be further elaborated by respective teaching methods that are deemed applicable. Both theories are largely lecture-based and centered around the lecturer, whereas teaching methods in for the behaviorism theory would include rote learning that largely relies on repetition to memorize the knowledge, multiple-choice tests, or drill and practice which mostly relates to content learning. For the cognitivism theory, the teaching methods are not limited to but include visual tools such as mind maps or charts to foster memorization as well as multiple-choice tests and essay assessment (Piskunova et al., 2018). In essence, it can be stated that the main difference between cognitivism and behaviorism theories lies in the learning theory (Steffe and Gale, 1995) and applied teaching methods

9

(Porcaro, 2011), whereas the learning outcome, role of the teacher as well as role of the student can be assumed identical as argued by Bain (2003). Opposed to instructivism, which is mainly teacher-focused with regards to how information and knowledge are relayed and passed along, constructivism emphasizes on active contribution from the student. Looking closer at the theory of constructivism, it shall be noted that there are claims how constructivism theory should be interpreted. The most known and influential claims were made by Piaget (1976) who describes the constructivism theory as cognitive constructivism, wherein on the other hand Dewey (1933; Dewey et al. 1999) and Vygotsky (1978) interpret it as social constructivism. These are the two fundamental pillars that define constructivism theory in education and have been widely accepted and used in the last decades. Nevertheless, there are sub-theories that emerged over the years, which will be further introduced in subchapter 2.3. The main differences of characteristics between cognitive constructivism as claimed by Piaget (1976) and socio-cultural constructivism as claimed by Dewey (1993) and Vygotsky (1978) are with the learning theory and also learning outcomes as also visualized in Table 3 below. Table 3. Features associated with constructivism educational theory (cited from Dewey 1933; Piaget, 1976; Vygotsky, 1978; Dewey, Wald, Quitoriano and Dengler, 1999) Educational Theory

Sub-classification

Learning Theory

Learning Outcomes

Teachers’ role

Students’ role

Constructivism Cognitive constructivism

Engagement with others, construct personal meaning

Creating collaborations and interpreting knowledge

Facilitates learning by providing a suitable environment

Active constructor of knowledge and center of learning environment

Socio-cultural constructivism

Constructing interrelated subjective meaning with more knowledgeable peers

Flexible thinking skills and the domain practices for lifelong learning

Facilitator, tutor, mentor and guide

Center of learning environment and participant in community practice

The learning theory regarding cognitive constructivism aims to seek engagement amongst peers and construct a personal meaning in order to create knowledge transfer (Piaget, 1976). Socio-cultural constructivism on the other hand seeks to construct correlated and subjective meaning with more knowledgeable peers (Dewey, Wald, Quitoriano and Dengler, 1999). As far as the role of the lecturer and student is concerned, both sub-classifications of the constructivism theory agree that the teachers’ role is to facilitate learning by providing a suitable learning environment while interacting with students to tutor, guide and mentor the discussion in order to facilitate the knowledge transfer. In the constructivism theory, the students are the active constructor of knowledge and form the center of the respective learning environment. Lastly, the learning outcomes for both interpretations of constructivism theory

10

differs slightly, wherein cognitive constructivism seeks to create collaborations and interpreting knowledge, whereas socio-cultural constructivism pursues flexible thinking skills and the domain practices for lifelong learning (Dewey, Wald, Quitoriano and Dengler, 1999). As stated at the beginning of the subchapter, one of the main differentiators between instructivism compared to constructivism is the role of the teacher and student, however, there are other distinguishable differentiators that describe each educational theory as seen in Table 4 below. The social learning aspect through interaction, communication, and socialization with peers is a large differentiator between constructivism and instructivism, wherein the latter rather emphasizes on task-based learning, wherein it is believed that repetition will lead to hardwiring of experiences. Constructivism on the other hand emphasizes that students are supposed to share their own knowledge as a prerequisite to build new knowledge or change the students’ perception of particular information (Wald, Quitoriano and Dengler, 1999) and supported by Crosslin (2016). Table 4. Comparison of Instructivism vs. Constructivism characteristics (cited from Wald, Quitoriano and Dengler, 1999; Badia and Iglesias, 2019)

Property Instructivism Constructivism Behaviorism Cognitivism Cognitive constructivism &

Socio-cultural constructivism How learning occurs

Black box: observable behavior main focus

Structured, computational

Social, meaning is created by each learner, personal

Influencing factors

Nature of reward, punishment, stimuli

Existing schema, previous experiences

Engagement, participation, social, cultural

Role of memory

Hardwiring of repeated experiences where reward and punishment are most influential

Encoding, storage, retrieval

Prior knowledge remixed to the current context

How transfer occurs

Stimulus, response Duplicating knowledge constructs of “knower”

Socialization

Types of learning best explained

Task-based learning Reasoning, clear objectives, problem-solving

Social, vague (“ill-defined”)

Crosslin (2016) argued that another characteristic that differentiates instructivism and constructivism is that in the constructivism theory, it is believed that the more the learner knows, the more peers can benefit and learn as well, while he claims that in the instructivism theory, the knowledge transfer is dependable on the existing knowledge of the teacher who is regarded as the primary agent of learning. Badia et al. (2019) further support the claim made by Crosslin (2016) and add that contextual learning is another differentiator for both theories, wherein constructivism theory does not teach isolated facts and information that have no relationship to the bigger picture, whereas instructivism does (Badia and Iglesias, 2019).

11

2.3. Cognitive Constructivism and Social Constructivism Though both interpretations of the constructivism theory share the same basic principles, there is a fundamental difference between cognitive constructivism and social constructivism or socio-cultural constructivism. The term social constructivism and socio-cultural constructivism are used interchangeably in this paper. Furthermore, this subchapter aims to discuss the differences between both interpretations as well as other sub-interpretations that emerged in recent years. The theoretical views of the respective educational models are supported by the publication that claimed and described them initially, whereas if a more recent publication added any claim, it will be subsequently mentioned and argued in the respective definition of the theoretical models. While main characteristics that distinguish cognitive constructivism and social constructivism were already highlighted in the previous subchapter and visualized in Table 3 and Table 4, there is still a need to provide an academic definition for both interpretations in order to provide more context in the discussion of both theories. Cognitive Constructivism

According to the theory developed by Piaget, it is argued that knowledge is produced and formed based upon the experience of an individual. Piaget claims that the formation and adoption of knowledge depend on two main elements that are considered significant for this educational theory: accommodation and assimilation. The latter refers to the adoption of new experiences into existing experiences, while the former is referring to allowing new experiences to complement existing experiences. In other words, it can be described that assimilation alters the existing experience, whereas accommodation allows the experience to expand, wherein both lead to a new perception of knowledge. (Piaget, 1976).

Social Constructivism

The theory of social constructivism claimed by Dewey (1933, 1999) argued that repetitive and rote memorization in education did not lead to the desired outcome; furthermore Dewey (1999) claimed it as ineffective and inefficient to develop knowledge and acquire competencies. Dewey (1933, 1999) argues with his theory that education and knowledge transfer and advancement should be fostered through practical workshops; engage in real-world projects, in which students can demonstrate their knowledge through creativity and collaboration (Dewey, 1933). Vygotsky (1978) agreed on that notion and further argued that education should be student-centered and knowledge transfer occurs through building relationships amongst peers (Vygotsky, 1978).

Within the theory of constructivism, the cognitive constructivism claimed by Piaget (1976) as well as social constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978; Dewey et al. 1999) have been the backbone of the scientific community for many decades. Many subsequent papers and research projects are built on the well-argued interpretation of constructivism, however, as the educational needs continue to evolve and transform, there has been another layer of sub-classification in the recent years that further distinguish cognitive constructivism as well as social constructivism as seen in Figure 4 below, which visualizes the latest hierarchical construct of constructivism educational theories (Karpouza and Emvalotis, 2019; Pavlović and Maksić, 2019). While a very in-depth analysis of each sub-interpretation of the constructivism theory does not

12

contribute direct value to the research objective of this paper, it is important to understand the emerging theories in their respective context and therefore a brief definition for each of the sub-interpretations as visualized in Figure 4 below will be provided in order to put them into context when introducing the flipped classroom concept in subchapter 2.5. Figure 4. The hierarchical construct of constructivism educational theories (based on the original theories and claims from Dewey, 1993; Piaget, 1976; Vygotsky, 1978) The following three modified concepts were developed based on the original idea of cognitive constructivism and social constructivism respectively and will be further defined below. Radical Constructivism

Radical constructivism can be described as a theory that closely relates to the claims made by Piaget in 1976, whereas Von Glaserfeld argues it as a more radical perspective. Von Glaserfeld claims that at the center of knowledge construction is the individual and the individuals’ interactions and interpretations, which can be further influenced by externalities. The theory of knowledge relevant to radical constructivism is based on two main principles. Firstly that knowledge is not passively received, but gradually built over time and secondly that the perception and reasoning of the learner serve better for the organization of the experiential world and not for the discovery of ontological realism. (Von Glaserfeld, 1984, 2003).

Critical Constructivism

Fleury, Garrison and Désautels (1998) define critical constructivism as the extension of social constructivism as originally defined by Dewey (1933, 1999) and Vygotsky (1978), whereas Fleury et al. (1998, 2007) argue that knowledge is not a tangible substance that can be deposited like money in a bank and withdraw at any time. It is further claimed that knowledge is constructed in the minds of the individual and formed by the society that surrounds the individual (Fleury et al., 1998; Fleury et al., 2007).

Cultural Constructivism

Hutchison (2006) agrees with the initial description and claims made by Dewey (1933, 1999) and Vygotsky (1978) with regards to social constructivism, however, Hutchinson (2006) adds that social constructivism is cultural-centered and should be interpreted in

ConstructivismTheory

CognitiveConstructivism

(Piaget)

RadicalConstructivism(vonGlaserfeld)

SocialConstructivism

(Dewey,Vygotsky)

CulturalConstructivism(Hutchinson)

CriticalConstructivism

(Fleury)

13

the context of the relevant culture. Hutchinson (2006) claims that knowledge can be interpreted and developed differently based on the cultural values of a society. It is further claimed that there is not only one knowledge that is correct and applicable for a specific topic or field, but rather a diversity of different knowledge perspectives that may answer the same question depending on the cultural context (Hutchison, 2006).

2.4. Constructivism: Distance Learning and Connectivism Distance learning can be described as an educational approach within the constructivism theory, wherein traditional face-to-face classroom teaching is replaced with classes that are carried out entirely online (Graham, 2006). The distance learning approach strongly depends on the support of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Even though the distance learning approach is not a new method to the educational sector, however, there is still a lot of ambiguity with regards to its place in higher education as claimed by Havemann, Charles, Sherman, Rodgers and Barros (2019). It was stated that distance learning is the result of a replaced physical classroom teaching approach with an online classroom that can be accessed remotely from any location. Distance learning is strongly supported by Information and Communication Technologies (Graham, 2006). In most cases, the virtual classroom is facilitated by a Learning Management System (LMS) which can be described as a learning platform that provides a forum for students and teachers to interact, communicate and initiate the knowledge transfer virtually (Dziuban, Graham, Moskal, Norberg and Sicilia, 2018). Dziuban et al. (2018) further argue that without the rapid development of ICT since the late 1990s and early 2000’s there would not be the same distance learning concepts that can be seen nowadays as it strongly depends on the use of ICT. Drawing back to the LMS as a platform to facilitate the virtual classroom, oftentimes the lecturer provides tutorials on a particular subject, creates specific tasks that the students need to accomplish, or facilitates an online discussion on a certain topic. The difference to traditional classroom teaching is that the student is further empowered and able to chose the place from where the learning management system is accessed as opposed to a physical classroom within the educational facility. It offers a higher degree of flexibility to accommodate personal needs (Dziuban et al., 2018; Havemann et al., 2019; Hrastinski, 2019). Graham (2006) and Hrastinski (2019) both claim that distance learning is another step towards student empowerment, which further evolves the original theory from Piaget (1976) and Vygotsky (1978). While constructivism compared with instructivism shifts the focus towards student-centered education as opposed to teacher-focused education, distance learning arguably grants the student more freedom to choose the location and the environment to study in (Hrastinski, 2019; Havemann et al., 2019). Garrison and Kanuka (2004) claimed already more than 15 years ago that distance learning has the demonstrated potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of meaningful learning experiences, which is supported by many recent academic publications (Dziuban et al., 2018; Havemann et al., 2019; Hrastinski, 2019). However, in order to consider advantages of the distance learning approach, it should be stated that the advantage of distance learning depends on the perspective as there are three actors involved in distance learning: the student, the teacher and the educational institution (Garrison et al., 2004). Based on recent research that aimed to examine the perceived advantages of distance learning for students, it can be stated that students mostly valued the

14

flexibility, accommodation of different learning styles within the same course as well as helped them to reach their desired learning outcomes more efficiently (Saltan, 2017; Jin and Shang, 2019). On the other hand, teachers valued most that distance learning saved them lecturing time, which can be reallocated towards tutoring of students (Saltan, 2017; Herbert, Velan, Pryor and Kumar, 2017), while educational facilities can save money due to the fact that a smaller share of physical classroom space is used up (Herbert et al., 2017). While constructivism educational theory encompasses distance-education in higher education nowadays (Jin et al, 2019), connectivism is an integral learning theory that relates to the usage of Information and Communication Technologies in distance-education (Goldie, 2016). Goldie (2016) describes connectivism as a conceptual framework that interprets learning as a phenomenon influenced by technology and socialization. Similarly to Hutchinson (2006) who claimed that knowledge transfer and learning is depending on the cultural context. However, Goldie (2016) further claims that technology is an essential part that defines connectivism. Although connectivim is not a standalone educational theory similar to the instructivism or constructivism, neither it can be seen as a sub-classification within an existing educational theory such as cognitive constructivism as claimed by Piaget (1976) or socio-cultural constructivism as claimed by Dewey (1993) and Vygotsky (1978). However, connectivism is best interpreted as a supplementary learning theory that largely considers the technological aspect of learning theories (Goldie, 2016) and therefore has relevance and connection to this research project. Based on the publication by Goldie (2016) the conclusions with regards to connectivism learning theory were that there is not a single educational theory that explained connectivism. Connectivism is comprehensively reliant on the usage of Information and Communication Technologies that build the basis for this learning theory upon which knowledge is shared with the support of digital technologies, such as Learning Management Systems, communication tools for video conferences or messaging, or tools that enable to content creation and sharing. Through the means of these Information and Communication Technologies, connectivism helps in the process to form connections between the students with technology in order to engage in a knowledge transfer that was described by the respective educational theories (Goldie, 2016). In the following subchapter, the flipped classroom concept is introduced in detail before tying the educational theories, distance-learning, and flipped classroom concept together. 2.5. The Flipped Classroom The preceding subchapters built systematically on the educational theories related to flipped classrooms, whereas this subchapter will provide a more elaborative definition of the flipped classroom concept and design of a flipped classroom. It is the objective of the research to examine the perspective of distance-students; therefore the flipped classroom concept is elaborated on that basis. In order to fully grasp the concept, it is important to establish a general definition of flipped classrooms. Abeysekera et al. (2015) argue that the largest differences between a traditional classroom and flipped classroom are that the students receive information online that can be accessed remotely in order to familiarize themselves with the topic at hand and then take the acquired knowledge into the virtual classroom in order to have a more sophisticated discussion with the lecturer and peers on the specific subject (Abeysekera et al., 2015). In a traditional learning experience, the course instructor would hold a lecture in the form of one-way communication where information is passed to the students in order to increase their knowledge of a particular subject.

15

In a flipped classroom, the students have the opportunity to study the material remotely at their own pace and reflect on the content before discussing the topic critically in the virtual classroom (Baepler, Walker and Driessen, 2014). Comparing both approaches from a process and operational point of view, the traditional classroom method can be described with the following steps wherein the teacher instructs, students are encouraged to take notes accordingly, students follow guided instructions by the teacher, the teacher gives an assessment and students have homework to foster knowledge through repetition. Melzer (2019) describes that in the flipped classroom method, the following process steps that start with the teacher providing online guidance through an e-learning platform, students can access the e-learning platform at their convenience, students will study the material independently from a remote location. Next, students will attend a virtual classroom with prior knowledge and finally, the teacher and students discuss the particular topic, wherein each student has already acquired fundamental knowledge about the subject (Melzer, 2019). Table 5 below shows an increased amount of academic publications in the last six to eight years that mainly focus on the opportunities and challenges that flipped classrooms bear compared to a traditional classroom. Table 5. Amount of publications per year connected to flipped classrooms (Scopus, 2020)

Year: 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Publications: 0 0 13 72 183 402 447 504 623 639

The number of publications in the recent years revealed two primary findings: (1) the flipped classroom concept did not receive much attention prior to 2010 as the number of publications directly related to flipped classrooms did not yield any results in Scopus academic database and (2) that the amount of publications in the last three years exceeds the number of total publications. This suggests that the topic is considered as very relevant with regards to contemporary teaching methods and also offers a very recent and varied calls for further research that has not been answered yet, henceforth advancing the knowledge with regards to the flipped classroom concept can be seen as an advantage to fully understand this particular phenomenon. Supplementary to the definition of the flipped classroom, the theoretical flow chart in Figure 5 below is an example of how an effective and efficient flipped classroom process can be designed and applied (Mukherjee & Bleakney, 2017; Valdehita, Plata and Merodio, 2017). The pre-class stage is completed online from a remote location, wherein the student receives particular tasks on the given topic in order to acquire more knowledge (Mukherjee et al., 2017). The second stage of the flipped classroom model consists of a discussion in a virtual classroom. This part largely relates to the knowledge transfer amongst peers as claimed by Piaget (1976). The teacher acts here as a facilitator and guides the discussion, wherein the discussion itself is student-centered and amongst peers who had time to reflect on the information received in the first stage of the model. Mukherjee et al. (2017) further state that the third stage is described as post-class, which consists of more practice and formative as well as a summative assessment, which is also carried out online through the LMS.

16

Hence it can be said that one isolated flipped classroom session follows three repetitive steps that are delivered to the students (Mukherjee et al., 2017). As noted, the design of a flipped classroom is supported by an LMS, which forms the primary ICT that is used for flipped classrooms. The platform facilitates the communication between student and teacher as well as peer discussions, tutorial instructions for stage one, the virtual classroom for stage two as well as practice and assessment opportunities for stage three, which is post-class.

Figure 5. Theoretical design approach for a flipped classroom (adapted from Mukherjee & Bleakney, 2017) There has been considerable academic research about flipped classrooms in higher education that provide a holistic view of its application within the existing educational theory as well as advantages that the flipped classroom concepts offers (Bishop and Verleger, 2013; McLaughlin, Roth, Glatt, Gharkholonarehe, Davidson, Griffin, Esserman and Mumper, 2014; O'Flaherty and Phillips, 2015; Melzer, 2019) however there is a lack of academic research that examines the perception of the primary user of flipped classrooms: the students (Davies, Mitchell, Petter and Harris, 2017). This research aims to close the identified knowledge gap and aims to analyze how distance-students perceive benefits and challenges with the flipped classroom concept as part of their educational journey as opposed to the traditional classroom teaching method. The collected data in the subsequent chapter will then be linked back to the theoretical framework and the review of existing literature from this chapter in order to facilitate a versatile and reliable discussion that will advance the knowledge in the field of informatics with regards to flipped classrooms (Fulton, 2012; Melzer, 2019).

< Stage 1 > < Stage 2 > < Stage 3 > Individual With teacher Individual Pre-Class During-Class Post-Class Topic Orientation Active Learning Formative Summative

& Assessment Assessment Staging Activity Practice Teacher & Peer (examples) Feedback Feedback (assessed vs. (online or learning in person) outcomes)

17

2.6. Summary of the Review The review of the literature extensively discussed and examined the concept of flipped classrooms initiated by a top-down review of relevant educational theories as seen in Figure 6.

Constructivism Theory

Cognitive Constructivism Social

Constructivism

Radical Constructivism Critical

Constructivism Cultural Constructivism

Distance Learning

(Connectivism)

Flipped Classroom Concept

Figure 6. Hierarchical view of applied top-down approach for literature review (adapted from Capone, De Caterina and Mazza, 2017; Nahar and Chowdhury, 2019; Han and Elli, 2019) At the highest level, there are educational theories with regards to constructivism vs. instructivism, which described the different methods and characteristics of both theories. In essence, it can be stated that instructivism is teacher-focused and it is believed that repetition will lead to hardwiring of experiences, whereas constructivism is student-centered and emphasizes that knowledge transfer is initiated through socialization amongst peers. The second layer describes two different classifications of the constructivism theory. Cognitive constructivism (Piaget, 1976) and social constructivism (Dewey, 1933; Vygotsky, 1978; Dewey et al. 1999) share the same fundamental pillar of student-centered education, however cognitive constructivism aims to seek engagement amongst peers, while social constructivism seeks to construct subjective meaning (Piaget, 1976; Vygotsky, 1978). The third layer outlines different interpretations that relate to either cognitive constructivism or social constructivism by different researchers. These have mostly been developed and claimed within the last ten years and emphasize the fact that established educational theory is not static, but instead it evolves as the educational sector continues to seek new teaching methods in order to satisfy the demand (Havemann et al., 2019). Drawn from different interpretations of constructivism, the distance learning approach was introduced and discussed. Extensive claims have been made with regards to its application and advantages from the perspective of all three actors, i.e. student, teacher, and institution. Finally, the flipped classroom concept is analyzed based on the previously introduced educational theory. A versatile discussion has concluded an academic definition, the design framework for flipped classrooms as well as contemporary advantages of flipped classrooms.

18

3. Research Design This chapter aims to introduce the research design of this degree project and comprehensively elaborate on how the framework for the data collection has been built. The first chapter will discuss the methodological research tradition, before the subsequent subchapter will introduce the chosen methodological approach taking into account available alternatives. Furthermore the method for the data collection and data analysis will be presented and justified why the chosen method is the most suitable technique. The second last subchapter will discuss the reliability and validity of the research project, which is mostly referring to credibility, transferability, and confirmability of the results of the study. Lastly, ethical considerations that were taken into account will be mentioned and discussed. 3.1. Methodological Tradition This subchapter will introduce the research concepts, which are formed on the basis of the respective worldviews, which can be defined as ontology and epistemology. Furthermore, the corresponding research paradigms are presented and the chosen paradigm is further justified. In research, Ontology is referring to a set of concepts that seek to answer questions pertaining to what exists in reality. It is based on three core pillars (1) the belief that there is only one reality, (2) the belief that there are multiple realities and lastly (3) the belief that reality is constantly changing (Myer, 1997; Fletcher, 2017). Fetcher (2017) further claims that Ontology is important to determine the research paradigm, however that happens in correlation with Epistemology. Epistemology is referring to a theory of knowledge that seeks to distinguish through investigation of justified belief instead of an opinion that has no basis for its claim (Myer, 1997). Fletcher (2017) concurs with the earlier claim and further argues that Epistemology seeks a response to what we know already, what can we know and how we acquire knowledge. Similarly to Ontology, Epistemology is also based on three core pillars that believe that (1) knowledge can be measured, (2) reality needs to be interpreted and (3) reality should be examined with the best possible tools available (Fletcher, 2017).

Ontology

Epistemology

• One reality • Knowledge measurable Positivism

• Multiple realities • Reality interpretable Constructivism

• Reality is constantly changing • Examined with best tools Pragmatism

Figure 7. Relationship between Ontology, Epistemology and the Paradigms (adapted based on theory from Fletcher 2017) Ontology can also be described as the perceived reality and Epistemology as the knowledge claim. The combination of the ontological reality with epistemological knowledge claim

19

forms the respective research paradigm as visualized in Figure 7 (Fletcher, 2017). Cecez-Kecmanovic and Kennan (2018) argue that in Information Systems (IS) and Informatics the three paradigms in Figure 7 are most commonly utilized. For the purpose of this research project, the Pragmatism paradigm is the most suitable choice as the research seeks to collect qualitative data from students to examine and understand their perspective on the flipped classroom concept. The perspective can be assumed as a reality that is constantly changing and the knowledge claim should be analyzed with the best possible tools in order to understand the phenomena and reliably answer the initial research question. 3.2. Methodological Approach This subchapter will introduce the different methodological approaches that were considered in order to answer the research question. Furthermore, the characteristics of each approach will be introduced before justification will be provided why the chosen methodological approach was the best suited in order to accurately answer the initial research question. Research can be divided into three different approaches that share the same fundamental value to advance knowledge, however the methods that are used for each approach offer a different characteristics depending what the research objective seeks to achieve. Namely the three approaches can be labeled as qualitative approach, quantitative approach and mixed approach, which is a combination of a qualitative- and quantitative approach. Each approach seeks to answer a different type of research question with different methods that are part of the respective approach (Creswell and Creswell, 2017). As this study utilized the qualitative approach, it will be introduced first before presenting the available alternatives, i.e. quantitative approach and mixed methods. Creswell and Creswell (2017) claim that the qualitative research approach can be described as a process of inquiry that seeks to gain a more in-depth understanding of a social or human problem. The inquiry process is based on the construction of a complex and holistic picture that is formed with words. Furthermore it reports detailed views of informants and carried out in a natural seeking. A qualitative study is defined as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a natural setting. Silverman (2016) concurs with the description of Creswell and Creswell (2017) and adds that within the qualitative approach a reality is viewed as dynamic and negotiated. Silverman (2016) further adds that data is collected through observation and interpretation and is analyzed based on themes and descriptions that are the result of the observation and interpretation. Another element that is fundamental for the qualitative research approach is the presentation of the data, which is done in the language of the researcher that conducted the observation and interpretation (Silverman, 2016; Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Creswell and Creswell (2017) describe the quantitative approach as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem similarly to the qualitative approach. Contrary to the qualitative approach, the quantitative approach is based on a theory that is composed of different variables and measured with numbers and thereafter analyzed with statistical tools. The quantitative approach aims to determine if the theorized generalization of the theory holds (Silverman, 2016; Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Silverman (2016) adds to the claim that the quantitative approach assumes a fixed and measurable reality. And equally to the previous claim by Creswell and Creswell (2017) that the quantitative approach seeks to

20

collect data through measuring concepts and that results are most often expressed as numerical values that are compared against each other or similar studies. The results of a quantitative research are presented through statistical analysis other than the results of a qualitative research (Silverman, 2016; Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Table 6. Characteristics of qualitative- and quantitative research approach (adapted from Silverman, 2016; Creswell and Creswell, 2017) Characteristics Qualitative approach Quantitative approach

Process Inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem

Inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem

Concept Based on building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words

Based on a theory that is composed of different variables

Interpretation of reality

Reality is dynamic and negotiated

Reality is fixed and measurable

Data collection Participant observation and interpretation

Measuring concepts with numerical values

Data analysis Based on themes and descriptions

Comparison of numerical results

Data presentation Results are presented in the language of researcher

Results are presented through statistical tools

Table 6 above visualizes the main characteristics of the qualitative- and quantitative approach in a format that allows comparing them based on the claims and arguments by Silverman (2016) as well as Creswell and Creswell (2017). However, it was initially stated that there are three approaches that can be utilized in research. The mixed methods approach does not utilize characteristics from the qualitative approach combined with characteristics from the quantitative approach, however, it refers to using both approaches within the same research setting. An example that can illustrate a possible mixed methods approach scenario could be research that is conducted based on the qualitative approach and later the theory that evolved from the qualitative research approach is then further tested with the quantitative approach within the same research project. In that case, the terminology would refer to a mixed methods approach as it independently utilizes the qualitative- and quantitative approach (Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Within the qualitative approach, there are various strategies of inquiry available in order to collect the data. For the given research project, the author decided to conduct a case study, which entails a preliminary non-participant observation. The observation is aimed to get further familiarized with the concept of a flipped classroom and to collect data that serves in the process to create the questionnaire catalog for the primary data collection. The primary data collection within the designed case study framework is through semi-structured interviews with distance-students that participated in flipped classroom courses at Linnaeus University within the Department of Informatics and analyze their perception towards this teaching concept compared to traditional learning method.

21

The following paragraphs will justify the choice to conduct a case study as the chosen strategy to investigate the phenomena and comprehensively answer the stated research question. Even though there is no common agreement in the literature on how to exactly define a case study, there are common characteristics that are described by researchers (Runeson, Host, Rainer, and Regnell, 2012; Yin, 2017). Yin (2017) describes a case study as a systematic inquiry into a specific event or set of events, which further aims to examine the phenomena and later explain it through the analysis of data. Runeson et al. (2012) support the claim and add that a case study is a strategic research process that involves an empirical investigation of a particular phenomenon within its natural setting using multiple sources of evidence. The primary focus of a case study is to examine a novel occurrence and seeks answers pertaining to questions that are formed with how and why. To reiterate the research question in order to provide a direct link to the chosen research strategy that aims to answer the following question:

How do distance-students in higher education perceive benefits and challenges with the technology-enhanced flipped classroom concept as part of their educational journey as opposed to the traditional classroom teaching method?

The research question seeks to answer a phenomenon that is related to a how-question (Yin, 2017), and furthermore, the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clear (Runeson et al., 2012), therefore a case study is deemed a suitable strategy to answer the research question. A case study can be further classified into three categories, namely explanatory case study, exploratory case study, and lastly descriptive case study. An explanatory case study is used when the question that the research seeks to answer is too complex to answer through a quantitative approach. Exploratory case studies refer to situations in which the involvement is evaluated and not a clear, single outcome can be expected. Finally, the descriptive case study is used as a strategy to describe the involvement or phenomenon and the connection to real-life context (Runeson et al., 2012; Yin, 2017). Based on the nature of the research, the respective classification of the applied strategy corresponds to the exploratory case study as it is expected to receive not a clear, singular outcome, but potentially have multiple outcomes based on the perception of the participants. Yin (2017) further claims that case studies can be utilized for qualitative studies as well as quantitative studies, whereas it largely depends on the research strategy if a case study receives the attribute of qualitative or quantitative nature. It is further claimed that a primary advantage of case studies is the in-depth analysis and associated holistic view of the phenomena (Runeson et al., 2012), whereas the main disadvantage for case studies is that it can not be generalized to another context, which is further explained in subchapter 3.5. Another characteristic of a case study is to use multiple sources of data. This particular exploratory case study will make use of collected data through non-participant observation, which primarily serves to gain a better insight in order to effectively design the question catalog for the primary data collection through semi-structured interviews. The following subchapter will elaborate on the chosen data collection methods corresponding to the case study.

22

3.3. Method for Data Collection This subchapter will address the methods that were utilized in order to collect the data for this qualitative research. Furthermore, the entire process will be elaborated and the interaction before during and after the data collection with the participants. 3.3.1. Observation As stated in the previous subchapter, a non-participant observation was carried out on 18.2.2020 between 13:00 – 16:00 (GMT+1) in order to gain a more in-depth understanding of how the flipped classroom is applied at Linnaeus University within the Department of Informatics. Another motive to participate in the flipped classroom session was to purposefully build an effective question catalog for the primary data collection through semi-structured interviews. The question catalog that was designed based upon the observation can be seen in Appendix 2. The authors’ participation in the session on 18.2.2020 between 13:00 – 16:00 (GMT+1) was informed to the participating students in advance through the course instructor as well as the author himself. The author introduced himself and stated the motivation for his presence as part of ethical considerations towards the participants, though the author remained a non-participant observer for the duration of the flipped classroom session that was conducted between 11 distance-students and one course instructor. The data was collected through notes and formed later the basis for the question catalog for the interview, which will be described further next. 3.3.2. Interviews With regards to the interviews, there are generally three types that differentiate the nature of an interview for the purpose to collect data. An unstructured interview, semi-structured and structured. Structured interviews follow the pattern of closed questions throughout the interview with pre-coded responses, whereas contrary to that, unstructured interviews ask open-ended questions. Lastly, semi-structured interviews use a combination of open-ended questions as well as closed questions (Griffee, 2005). For either method, there are advantages and disadvantages. Griffee (2005) argues that the type of interview depends on the nature of the research and associated research question and what the researcher seeks to accomplish as all three offer different results that are used to answer different types of research questions. Using closed questions through structured interviews has the advantage to limit bias, as the participants’ response is limited to the pre-codes answers. Furthermore it allows faster execution of the interview, which is an advantage when a large group of people needs to be sampled. Another advantage is the compatibility of responses as participants’ are only able to respond to the pre-coded answers. On the other hand, unstructured interviews with open-ended questions have the advantage to gain a more in-depth understanding of the participants’ responses and hence have less room for interpretation, which increases the reliability of the results. Furthermore, Griffee (2005) states that open-ended questions have more flexibility as it offers the option to follow-up response with another open-ended question. Semi-structured interviews take elements of both and therefore the question catalog as seen in Appendix 2 consists of open-ended questions as well as closed questions to collect the data for the case study.

23

The selected type of interview offers the author to collect data that enables to gauge of a general sentiment of the students towards the flipped classroom concept as well as gain a more in-depth understanding of the usefulness and challenges as perceived by the students. The participants were invited to participate in the voluntary interview on 13.3.2020 with scheduled interviews between 16. - 23.3.2020. It was an open invitation through the students learning management system that facilities their flipped classroom and the allocation of interview slots was given to the first six students that responded to the invitation. The author decisively did not send any invitation to selected students only in order to avoid any bias in the sampling and selection of participants for the data collection. The selected students are active students at Linnaeus University at the faculty of Technology at the Department of Informatics. The participants are all distance-students that had actively participated in a flipped classroom and therefore gained first-hand experience. The flipped classroom course has a direct connection to Informatics, however, no specific details about the course will be disclosed as it would potentially risk revealing the identity of the participants who were promised confidentially about their participation in the interview. The invitation with a call to action also stipulated to contact the author directly about their desire to participate in order to protect their identity. Prior to the start of the interview, the participant was given informed consent as seen in Appendix 2, which was used to satisfy ethical considerations and explained the participants' rights in addition to the interview questions. Additionally, the six students were informed that they can withdraw from the research project at any time and that their participation is completely voluntary. The post-process of the interview consisted of scripting the audio recording of the interview upon which the student was given a copy of the transcript for further review to assess accuracy and approval to use the data. The student was reminded again that the participation was voluntary and the results of the interview can be withdrawn at any time. 3.4. Method for Data Analysis This subchapter will elaborate on the chosen method for data analysis as well as its merits pertaining to the nature of the collected data. The chosen method to analyze the collected data is thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is the most common form of data analysis for the qualitative research approach based on the highly cited claim by Guest, MacQueen and Namey (2011), which is further supported by a more recent publication from Braun, Clarke, Hayfield and Terry (2019). Guest et al. (2011) describe thematic analysis as a linear process that seeks to examine data in order to produce patterns that can be translated into themes. The themes become categories, which can be used for analysis before presenting the results in a research paper. Themes and categories are important to describe a phenomenon that is related to a specific research question (Braun et al., 2019). The process to analyze the data will be described based on the argued model introduced by Braun et al. (2019). Braun et al. (2019) further claim that the model offers a systematic and orderly approach to effectively analyze qualitative data by applying six individual phases as visualized in Figure 8 below. The six phases that are used in the thematic analysis have been applied in two separate cycles for this research project. Firstly, the process was applied when collecting data through the observation of a flipped classroom in order to analyze the data with the objective to form the

24

questionnaire catalog that is used for the primary data collection through semi-structured interviews. During the first phase, the author will become familiar with the gathered data by reading the notes and re-reading them again. In the second phase of the analysis process, the initial codes are generated through line-by-line open coding.

Figure 8. Six individual phases of thematic analysis (adapted from Braun et al., 2019) These codes were arranged by sub-themes in the subsequent third step of the process. In phase four, the themes were edited based on another review and thereafter refined. In the second last phase, three main themes were generated and associated with the earlier identified sub-

Phase 6

Organize themes and present in the research report to reflect participants’ perspectives

Phase 5

Define and name three key themes and associate sub-themes

Phase 4

Themes will be revised, reviewed and refined

Phase 3

Open codes will be arranged by sub-themes

Phase 2

Generation of initial codes through line-by-line open coding

Phase 1

Familiarization with the data through reading and re-reading

25

themes. The last phase consists of the organization of themes before including them in the research report to reflect the participants’ perspectives. The identified themes and corresponding results of the collected data will be presented in the next main chapter as part of the discussion of the results. 3.5. Reliability and Validity It is argued that qualitative research contributes as much to the advancement of knowledge compared with quantitative research. However the primary difference is that quantitative data results are mostly referring to numerical results that are presented with statistical tools as already described in subchapter 3.2. Generally qualitative research aims to make sense of words that have been collected depending on the strategy of inquiry and recognize patterns among words in order to build up a meaningful picture without compromising the integrity of the collected data through manipulation (Leung, 2015). Nevertheless, the researcher can undertake steps to maintain a high degree of quality data that is representative and trustworthy and essentially a reliable knowledge claim (Silverman, 2016). In that context, reliability is referring to the replicability of the research. Silverman (2016) states that if replicating the exact research process, the results should be identical to the previous research. However, in qualitative research it is challenging to ensure replicability, therefore consistency is of the utmost importance when conducting qualitative research. It is further argued that a marginal deviation is acceptable, however, consistency can be achieved through relentless comparison of the collected and analyzed data in order to avoid mistakes or inadequacies. In addition to reliability, validity is another factor that is considered important in qualitative research and Leung (2015) argues that the validity of the results refers to the trustworthiness or appropriateness of the research. This means, if the applied methodological approach was suitable to answer the initial research question and if the correct method of analysis and tools were utilized to receive a reliable result. Both reliability and validity are closely correlated in qualitative research as a low level of validity would reflect negatively on the reliability and vice-versa (Leung, 2015). For this paper, validity and reliability were ensured through the means of peer validation, assistance from supervisor, and course examiner. Through these means, the applied research framework has been validated to ensure a high degree of validity in addition to validation through established knowledge claims by existing publications. Other measures that were taken into account in order to achieve a high degree of reliability and strengthen the research were a sufficient amount of participants for the data collection. Additionally, the participants were given a transcript of the recorded interview in order to confirm the context to ensure that accurate data has been collected. Lastly, there is generalizability that seeks to validate if the results of the research are applicable for similar settings beyond the original scope of the study. Leung (2015) and Silverman (2016) argue that qualitative studies seek to answer a phenomenon in a specific setting with a certain population or group and the characteristics of qualitative studies usually do not have the attribute to be generalizable. Therefore the results of this study are considered specific to answer the research question within the applicable scope of this research project.

26

3.6. Ethical Considerations This subchapter will discuss why ethical considerations were deemed necessary what considerations were taking with regards to research ethics when designing and conducting the pre-study to observe participants in the flipped classroom in anticipation to form the question catalog for the semi-structured interview, which together with the observation forms the framework for this case study. Creswell and Creswell (2017) define ethical considerations as a set of theoretical rules and practical guidelines to facilitate the conduct of good research practice. It entails common standards, values, and institutional arrangements that contribute to constituting and regulating research activities. The underlying motivation for ethical considerations in research derived from shared responsibility towards peers, participants, readers, environment, animals, and society in the widest sense (Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Creswell and Creswell (2017) further elaborate and indicate practical examples with regards to ethical considerations in research that can range from (1) avoiding scientific misconduct as such plagiarism, (2) reveal bad science from already published papers, (3) to differentiate science from pseudoscience, (4) to avoid any study that would cause harm to the participants and lastly (5) to provide a fair common ground when collaborating with other researchers and conducting peer-reviews. With regard to this research project, ethical considerations were thoughtfully considered and implemented in order to adhere to be a code of conduct for carrying out research and to avoid any breach of the previously mentioned practical examples. The following paragraphs will address ethical considerations for the pre-study as well as primary data collection that were taken into account based on the claims from Creswell and Creswell (2017). The research was commenced by a preliminary observation in a flipped classroom course in order to collect data through observation, which is anticipated to offer assistance when developing the questionnaire catalog for the semi-structured interviews. For the flipped classroom session in the virtual classroom, the course instructor introduced the author at the beginning of the course and provided context about his presence. Furthermore, the author gave context to the participants of the course that he will carry out an observation of the flipped classroom with regards to his Master’s thesis degree project without disclosing the exact objection of his research in order to avoid leading the discussion with any bias. With regards to data collection through semi-structured interviews, there were a few ethical issues that were taken into account before conducting the interview. Firstly, while anonymity can not be granted to the interviewee, the participants were guaranteed confidentiality and that their identity would not be disclosed. Another consideration is stigmatization, which is referring to any accusations or judgments based on the response from the participants. No judgment or accusation should be laid on the participants based on their responses. Another ethical consideration is the pledge of the author that none of the results were fabricated or falsified to accommodate the research objective, but instead the primary objective is to truthfully analyze the collected data and reflect on the sentiment that was shared by the participants of the interview. Additionally, the participants gave informed consent and were advised that the results of this study are for academic purposes only. Lastly, the participants of the interview were informed that their participation in the interview is voluntary and that they have the option to refuse to answer the questions, or part thereof as well as terminate the interview at any point in time.

27

4. Empirical Findings and Analysis The subsequent chapter is divided into two primary sections, which focus on the findings of the empirical data collection and discussion of these findings in connection with the relevant literature. The first section reports the findings in the sequence of the questionnaire catalog, while the second section is organized by the categories and themes that were identified in the thematic data analysis process. This subchapter will purposefully present the findings that were collected through the interviews with seven participants on their perception concerning benefits and challenges with the flipped classroom concept. The interviews were conducted between 18th March 2020 and 4th April 2020 with active distance-students at the department of Informatics, Linnaeus University. 4.1. Demographic Profile The first part of the questionnaire catalog as seen in Appendix 2 contained closed questions with pre-coded answers in order to establish demographic information and build a profile of the participant. The aggregated answers are shown in Table 7 below. Table 7. Demographics of the interview participants (based on own empirical data collection) Sequence [Code] Gender Age Group Educational Level

Participant 1 [P1] Female 21-29 years old Bachelor’s degree

Participant 2 [P2] Female 40 years or above Bachelor’s degree

Participant 3 [P3] Female 21-29 years old Bachelor’s degree

Participant 4 [P4] Female 40 years or above Others (Ph.D.)

Participant 5 [P5] Female 30-39 years old Master’s degree

Participant 6 [P6] Male 30-39 years old Master’s degree

Participant 7 [P7] Male 40 years or above Master’s degree

It can be noted that the male to female ratio of the participants was 5:2 in favor of female participants. In other words, 71% were female, while 29% of the participants were male. The physical location of these distance-students is within EU-countries and the location level was removed from the findings to guarantee full confidentiality of their identity. Additionally, the educational level suggests a mixed variety of educational backgrounds that range from a Bachelor’s degree (3), Master’s degree (3), and Doctor of Philosophy (1). Furthermore, none

28

of the participants is a tuition-paying student for their current Master’s degree at Linnaeus University; henceforth this category will not be analyzed further as it does not offer any insights. The following figures will complete the demographic profile of the interview participants before the primary findings of the participant’s perception of the flipped classroom will be presented. The below mentioned Figure 9 visualized the data with regards to the participant’s awareness that the course they participated in would be conducted as a flipped classroom. Out of the seven participants, only one was aware that the class would be conducted as flipped classroom. 4.2. Sentiment Discoveries Furthermore, the participants were asked if they would describe their level of involvement in the flipped classroom sessions as active and were given pre-coded answers ranging from disagree (1), somewhat disagree (2), neutral (3), somewhat agree (4) and agree (5) based on the Likert scale. Three participants stated that they were very active in the flipped classroom sessions, wherein one was somewhat active, one felt neutral about it and two participants somewhat disagreed and disagreed respectively as highlighted in Figure 9 below.

Figure 9. Interviewees’ participation level during the discussion of the FC (based on own empirical data collection) In order to establish the sentiment of the participants about their perception of the flipped classroom and in order to conclude the demographic profile, question 2.c. aimed to grasp, if the participants of the interview favor the flipped classroom concept or traditional classroom teaching, which was answered 6:1 in favor of the flipped classroom sessions. Furthermore, the participants were asked to justify their responses, which were summarized in Table 8 below.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

1=Disagree 2=Somewhatdisagree

3=Neutral 4=Somewhatagree

5=Agree

29

Table 8. Sentiment between FC and traditional classroom by the participants (based on own empirical data collection) Participant Code

Preference Flipped Classroom Perceived Benefits

Flipped Classroom Perceived Challenges

P1 Flipped Classroom

Learn from peers; Motivation to prepare in advance; Ability to watch, rewind take breaks

-

P2 Traditional Classroom

Possibility to actively contribute

Less flexibility in a noisy environment

P3 Flipped Classroom

Preparing in advance leads to better learning outcomes

-

P4 Flipped Classroom

Prepare in advance and the ability to have more sophisticated discussion

Topic is new and felt insecure to answer in front of peers

P5 Flipped Classroom

Can listen to what peers think about a specific topic

-

P6 Flipped Classroom

More interesting content when discussing with others

-

P7 Flipped Classroom

The discussion is the most valuable in learning sessions

-

It can be noted that the majority of the participants’ sentiment pertaining to the flipped classroom concept was positive and many perceived benefits were mentioned and elaborated by the participants. Furthermore, six participants stated that they prefer the flipped classroom concept instead of traditional classroom experience, wherein one participant [P2] stated that her current circumstances did not allow her to participate to the fullest extent in the flipped class sessions, but generally, she would prefer the flipped classroom concept, if her personal circumstances were different. All participants had a common consensus about the usefulness of the flipped classroom concept and amongst the benefits that were stated were active learning, sophisticated discussions, more interesting content, discussion as a teaching method and motivation to prepare in advance.

“You learn from others more and you have to prepare in advance. And you get new questions that you can ask later.” [P1]

“I feel that I learn much more, because I have more motivation to prepare for the class.” [P3]

“I prefer the flipped classroom because mainly you are more engaged and involved in the discussion.” [P4]

“The discussion about what you have, seen, read ,or looked at in the recorded lecture is the most valuable learning session.” [P7]

Based on the preliminary sentiment findings by the participants, it can be stated that the participants have generally a positive perception of the flipped classroom. The following paragraphs will share the findings with regards to the open-ended questions that allowed

30

gaining a more in-depth insight into the perception by students and the usefulness and challenges associated with the flipped classroom concept. 4.3. Descriptive design of the Flipped Classroom To provide findings with regards to the participants’ perception of the flipped classroom usefulness and challenges, it is important to establish a perceived definition of the flipped classroom by the participants. Therefore this section aims to establish a definition of the flipped classroom concept as perceived and described by the participants based on their own experience. In their own words, all participants concurred that the flipped classroom concept they experienced instigated with material that needed to be studied in advance and ahead of the respective lecture. P3 stated that the pre-class learning material as the basis for the discussion part of the flipped classroom concept was made available in LMS that is Moodle for Linnaeus University. Furthermore, P1 specified in an earlier question that one advantage of the method is that she was able to view the material in advance, take a break when needed, and to rewind if necessary. With regards to the during class session that includes the discussion part of the flipped classroom concept, the participants unanimously agreed that this part is active and discussion-based. P3 added that the during-class session is rather a discussion than a lecture and P1 commented that it is primarily focused on the thoughts that were developed during the pre-class stage. P4 described that the teacher will guide the discussion by asking questions, wherein P7 stated that the teacher attained a passive role and it was up to the students what to make off the respective sessions. Another insight that was brought forward was that the flipped classroom was designed; it directed the students towards gaining a deeper understanding through prior learning of the material and then discussing it afterward as stated by P2. Similarly P5 added that the FC is perceived as a smarter way to learn.

“A class where you prepare in advance [...]. You will also watch the materials in advance. It is more focused on the thoughts you made. More on the insights you gained from reading the materials, then just about listening.” [P1]

“You really need to get an understanding of the material before you join the classroom. It sort of forces you to study in advance to get a deeper understanding that allows you to participate actively.” [P2]

“You prepare in advance. You get the learning materials through Moodle. And you prepare before the class is actually happening. During the class, you have a discussion instead of a lecture.” [P3]

“We are required to read the material before and also to look at the online lectures. Based on the lectures and material, we will have the session. The teacher will ask some questions that we are supposed to discuss during class.” [P4]

“We have to study in advance before the classroom begins. Then we have to actively participate during the class. And we have to share our opinion. It is a smarter way to learn.” [P5]

31

“Most of the classes, we are required to study the material in advance. Then we go to the online classroom at a specific time and discuss what we have learned. The teacher usually guides the discussion.” [P6]

“My fellow course mates, I, and the teacher have a discussion and share our opinions based on the material we studied in advance. The teacher is more passive than in a regular class. It is very much up to us students what we make of that session.” [P7]

All participants described the topic orientation as part of the pre-class stage and mentioned keywords such as active learning, discussion-based and student-controlled environment, however, none of the participants referred to the post-class stage when asked to describe the flipped classroom based on their experience. 4.4. Participants perception of the Flipped Classroom This section will provide the findings that are related to the students’ perception of the flipped classroom concept. The findings are organized by themes in accordance with the sequence of the questionnaire catalog. The following findings are related to communication, information and communication technology, and learning experience with the flipped classroom course. 4.4.1. Communication The participants gave the following answers when asked to comment on their communication with the teacher during the flipped classroom sessions, which gave a wide range of responses with regards to their perception concerning the communication during the flipped classroom sessions. The responses range from very positive comments that include keywords such as equal power distance or talking to a friend. On the other end, the communication between student and teacher also brought forward some concern, which is linked to keywords such as awkward silence or initial shyness.

“I think we work a bit better in the flipped classroom [as opposed to a traditional classroom] and discuss a lot. [...] At the beginning it was very awkward though. We needed several sessions to have good communication with each other. There was a lot of silence. Even though you can see their faces [on the computer screen], you are not really sure if they can hear you well and it feels weird.” [P1] “At first everyone was a little bit shy or stiff. Right now, there are about 8 to 10 participants [...] we have had about seven or eight sessions now and the communication is really good. There is not really any communication in the pre-class stage. It is a one-way communication. You listen to the recorded lecture. The communication only starts during the class.” [P2] “The communication between teacher and students was good. [...] But sometimes it feels like our group is too big. We are at times 15 students and if everyone is supposed to say something. Even the most active students respond to only two to three questions. Is that enough? I am not sure.” [P3]

32

“The teacher gives us an introduction. After the introduction, we have questions that we are supposed to discuss. The teacher gives us some clue if we get stuck. They try to engage us in the discussion [...] It is active from both sides and definitely a two-way communication. The teacher is also involved, but it is a balance. They try not to impact or lead us too much.” [P4] “The communication was quite good. Everyone was talking, not only the teacher and the same two or three students answer. It was really active.” [P5] “If I base it solely on the course, it is a really active and good discussion. I think it has also a lot to do with the fact that people come from different backgrounds. As a result it has been very enriching. And it is mostly us talking, the teacher only sparks the conversation and then steps out and let us discuss it further.” [P6] “At first, when you do not know each other, it is a little uneasy. You do not know the individuals. You are not yet secure with the teacher and therefore have more hesitation to ask questions or bring the discussion forward. But after a few sessions, we had a really good tone. It is fun. We also make jokes with each other and people are sharing a lot of interesting perspectives. The exchange of ideas and knowledge transfer progresses. The teacher is involved, yes. But it is really us, students, that decided in which direction we want to take the discussion. The teacher is rather passive as long as we keep an active dialogue [...] The course needs several sessions. You can not do just one flipped classroom session. It takes time to build that base and therefore you need a series of meetings. So that people sort of getting to know each other and feel comfortable to share their stuff.” [P7]

The findings based on the communication aspect in the flipped classroom session revealed that students have a diversified perspective, however generally perceive the sessions as positive and interactive. P7 stated that a series of sessions would be required in order to build a foundation that is needed in order to effectively communicate and share opinions, which is further supported by P2 who stated that it was stiff at first, but improved through multiple sessions. Participants P1 through P7 commented that the sessions are active and P4, P6 and P7 indicated that the teacher held a more passive role and only got involved to guide the discussion when necessary, while P5 added that everyone was involved, not only limited to the teacher. 4.4.2. Technologies This section will present findings that are related to the technological aspect of the flipped classroom and primarily focuses on the usage of ICT in order to support the flipped classroom sessions. The subsequent findings will elaborate on positive aspects of current ICT usage as well as areas for improvement based on the participants’ experience and perception.

“I use Moodle [Learning Management System] to see what I should read before the class. I also use Google Drive to store my data for the class. And I also use Zoom and Google Hangout afterward. Things work well. They [the applications] work well together. Zoom works really well through the desktop application or on my phone. Of course it would be best if there would be only one application for communication and accessing information.” [P1]

33

“Often there is some confusion on how to use the ICT. Students are late or not prepared. This method is definitely not recommended for courses that are taught in the first semester. For the recording of the lecture, I use MyMoodle [Learning Management System]. And during-class I use Zoom. Zoom works really well. Probably one of the best applications I used in education. After class, I mostly use Google Slides, Documents and Hangout to share content and WhatsApp [Communication Application] for communication. Many students prefer sending a text message than voice communication.” [P2] “Pre-class, I am using MyMoodle [Learning Management System] to watch the recorded lecture. And then I have been using the university’s online library to download the recommended articles for the class. During the class, I am only using Zoom. It is a videoconference software for the active discussion part. After class, my team members and me meet once per week via Skype and WhatsApp [Communication Application] as an instant communication tool. Also, we use Google Docs to share information [...] For me, Skype, Zoom and Hangout are equally easy to use. It is random that we chose Skype for our teamwork. All the applications work really well. The only time it felt weird when we combined distance-students and campus-students into the same session and needed to present. It was somehow an awkward experience, because we felt like outsiders.” [P3] “I use Moodle to watch the videos. I use Google Scholar to find articles. During class I use Zoom and afterwards for the group work I use the Google applications and Skype. I think Zoom works really well. It is easy to use. I can not think of any problems with the technologies. I do not really have anything to complain about them.” [P4] “I am using Zoom. During class when the camera is on. Otherwise I use my personal email to communicate and Moodle to watch the video clips. For my group work, I use Google Hangout and Google Drive. It is easy to modify the documents. Many people can work on one file at the same time. I like that. I think everything is working quite well, except that I need a strong Internet connection. The only thing that could be improved would be the interface in Moodle. It seems a little bit old and messy. Sometimes a more fresh design and lesser information would be better. It would look more professional and developed. ” [P5] “I use Zoom to connect to my classes. Otherwise I use Moodle. Sometimes I am having problems accessing the information there, because of my browser. Otherwise we use WhatsApp and Skype. I am not very comfortable with WhatsApp. It is not very personal. During the class with Zoom, it works really well. I do not have anything to complain about.” [P6] “Pre-class it is the university’s platform where I can access the pre-recorded material before the actual class. Parallel we use Google Hangout to discuss the upcoming lecture in order to prepare better. During the class, it is a video tool. Zoom. I do not use anything else. I do not write anything down. I just take an active part in the conversation. [...] I use mainly Google Docs tools to communicate and share information with my group in the post-class.[...] I had a very good experience with Zoom. I have not worked much with Google Suites, but they seem to add value to the course. It gives the possibility to work wherever you are and whenever you have the time since we are distance-students. [...] It is important that everyone is able to contribute when they have the time.” [P7]

34

The findings with regards to the technological aspect of the flipped classroom discovered that students use a variety of Information and Communication Technologies pre, during and post class of their flipped classroom course. The applications that were mentioned are videoconferencing and communication tool Zoom that is mainly used in the during-class stage. For pre-class, the participants stated that the university’s online library, Google Scholar and Moodle as Learning Management System are utilized. For post-class, the emphasis is primarily on communication amongst team members through applications, i.e. WhatsApp, Skype or Google Hangout in addition to sharing and creating content through Google Suites (Google Slides, Google Drive or Google Documents). Generally, the respondents commented that their experience with ICT is throughout positive. P7 stated that the current ICT environment allowed students to access and contribute actively from any remote location at a convenient time for the respective student. P5 stated that the Learning Management System would add more value if it focuses on the core content only and P6 commented about access problems to Moodle, which caused the student an inconvenience as the content was not available when it was necessary. 4.4.3. Learning Experience The subsequent findings pertain to the participants’ learning experience with the flipped classroom. This section is intended to share additional findings that are relevant to answer the research question based on comments made by the interview participants with regards to their learning experience with the flipped classroom at Linnaeus University.

“I had some concentration issues, therefore watching the pre-lecture at my own pace and the ability to rewind and pause is great. I find that this is a great benefit for me.” [P1]

“This course is one of my worst communication experiences with my classmates. I think it is because we did not really get to know each other beforehand. I think it could also be cultural. [...] It is really easy for others to hide behind anonymity and take no responsibility for their tasks.” [P2]

“I did not have much experience with the flipped classroom before I started this course. I did not even really think about what it would mean. Usually I prepare always in advance for lectures, but after a few weeks into the semester, it sometimes slides. But for the flipped classroom, I have a different motivation and still prepare for every session. Because you get tested in the class.” [P3] “The flipped classroom was never really explained. They took it for granted that everyone knew. I did not really know what it was. After the first lesson, I looked it up and checked what it means.” [P4] “At the beginning, it was a little strange. I have to study on my own and then need to participate in a session to share what I learned. It felt a little scary in the beginning to share my opinions. It was not like the other classrooms that I am used to.” [P5] “I did not know what the flipped classroom was before. I think it is a very good method of learning because you can listen to other people’s opinions. Actually, any kind of distance education is great because it works best with my job and lifestyle. Sometimes the

35

mandatory attendance for the flipped classroom is not good and I would prefer just a recording that I can watch when I am available.” [P6] “I know already about the flipped classroom before. I really like the concept. I like that we are challenged to take in some kind of information through a different means. First you have to start on your own and make up your mind about it with less bias. And then when the class starts, you have something to discuss about and can change your opinion based on the feedback you receive from others.” [P7]

The majority of participants stated that they had no prior experience with the flipped classroom before attending the course, however, they commented on the usefulness of the concept. P7 commented that it allowed him to absorb new information through other means than what he is used to and the way the flipped classroom was designed allowed acquiring new information with less bias. Similarly, P5 commented that the method allowed listening to opinions by peers, which had a positive impact on her learning outcomes, whereas P6 stated that distance-learning, in general, is beneficial as it is easier to combine with work and personal life. However, P6 also stated that the flipped classroom sessions require attendance at a specific time, which sometimes causes challenges for him. P2 stated that this course was a bad learning experience as the communication with peers was sub-par and students with lower overall motivation are allowed to hide behind the anonymity of the Internet, which causes additional workload for other students when completing group projects. P1 stated that the ability to rewind and pause the pre-class material is a great benefit for her and allowed her to prepare at her own pace for the active learning session, i.e. during class session. P3 commented that the ways in which the flipped classroom was designed, helped her to achieve a higher motivation level throughout the course as opposed to a lecture-based course. 4.5. In-class discussion as an accelerator for knowledge transfer It can be stated that the majority of comments that were made by the participants with regards to their perception of the flipped classroom were of positive nature. All of the participants commented that they preferred the flipped classroom teaching compared to traditional lecturing. Primarily the preparation in advance, as well as the discussion sessions, were mentioned by the participants as positive contributors. Many of the participants mentioned that these means had a positive effect on achieving their learning outcomes and some also mentioned that without the flipped classroom teaching, they would not be able to achieve the same learning outcomes and knowledge transfer. In particular, finding that related to a positive perception of the participants that were mentioned was the ability to learn from peers, a higher motivation level to prepare for the class compared to traditional classroom teaching as well as the ability to actively contribute in the discussion and therefore influence the learning outcomes of others. Furthermore, a participant stated that benchmarking their knowledge to others gave an interesting insight into one's own ability and level of knowledge by listening to a peer discussion in a passive role. While all participants agreed that the discussion was the most valuable part of the flipped classroom, which is based on fundamental knowledge that had been acquired ahead of the discussion-based class, not all comments that were made related to a positive perception of the flipped classroom. Therefore the negative comments that were

36

made shall be deeded as limitations of the flipped classroom based on the experience by the participants. These primary comments that were made related to the initial hurdle to speak up by not knowing each other’s as well as the requirement of a quiet learning environment, if the participant wants to actively participate in the discussion. The hierarchical relationship between the empirical findings and the corresponding themes, subthemes, and codes are visualized in Figure 10 below. There were totally three relevant main themes with a total of further three subthemes that were deeded relevant to this research. The details of the coded findings are further presented in detail in Table 9 below.

Figure 10. Hierarchical perspective how the findings were categorized (own data collection) Essentially, three main advantages can be outlined based on the analysis of the empirical findings. Participants repeatedly stated that (1) the discussion assisted them to foster the knowledge transfer. Despite that the participants had different levels of participation in the discussion according to their perception, all participants agreed that the discussion amongst peers was helpful to advance their knowledge and reach the learning objectives of the course. Furthermore, the participants stated that (2) the ability to contribute and influence the discussion and affect their learning outcomes was perceived as particularly positive. Lastly, (3) another main advantage of the flipped classroom sessions for distance students was the flexibility to participate in the active sessions from remote locations and incorporate the course into their daily routine. Though the perception of the flipped classroom concept is positive, there were also shortcomings that the participants addressed. The participants stated that (1) there was a limitation to use the flipped classroom concept for a one-off session. The initial barrier to communicate required a series of meetings to engage in a meaningful discussion. Furthermore (2) the teacher is needed as required as a facilitator to spark initial discussion while participants still getting to know each other. Though the teachers involved faded as the sessions progressed. Lastly (3) a limitation is to actively take part in the discussion when situated in a noisy environment, as it would not only disrupt the participants’ learning but also affect other participants if there were noise disturbances.

Findings Themes Subthemes Codes

Empirical Findings

Sentimental Involvement ref Table 9

Flipped Classroom

Design ref Table 9

Participants perception

Communication ref Table 9

Technology ref Table 9

Learning Experience ref Table 9

37

Table 9. Summary of the relationship between themes, subthemes and coded findings (based on own data collection) Themes Subthemes Keywords / coded findings

Sentimental Involvement

( - ) • Participants classify themselves as relatively active in the course

• Benefit to learn from others • Higher motivation to prepare in advance • Possibility to actively contribute • Less flexibility in a noisy environment • Content is perceived as more appealing • Initial hesitation to share thoughts during the

discussion Flipped Classroom Design

( - ) • Prepare in advance • Deeping understanding • Active participation of students • Discussion instead of a lecture • Passive involvement of teacher

Participants perception

Communication • Uncomfortable at first (barrier of to getting to know each other; lots of silence)

• One-way communication pre-class (teacher > student)

• Two-way communication during class (student = student; with the teacher as a guide)

• Two-way communication post-class (student = student; no teacher involvement)

• Audio communication most preferred way of communication

Technology • Zoom video conferencing technology perceived as a value-added application that is easy to use

• Content is shared with Google Suites (Drive, Documents, Slides, Hangout)

• Learning Management System only for access information, not communication

Learning Experience

• Ability to pause, rewind and re-watch the pre-recorded lecture

• Better learning outcome through (1) active discussion and (2) study material in advance

• Barrier to getting to know each other is perceived as an important factor

• Instant feedback from others helps to achieve learning goals

38

5. Discussion This chapter will seek to answer the initial research question based on the collected data from the previous chapter. The empirical findings are presented by themes that were identified and formed in the thematic analysis process. The findings will be further supported by the relevant literature that was introduced in the second chapter of this research project in order to ultimately answer the research question through the means of the collected data with the support of scientific publications. 5.1. Introduction to the discussion This subchapter highlights the three themes and subsequent subthemes that were identified during the thematic analysis process. The findings within the themes will be linked to the relevant literature that was introduced in the second chapter of this thesis as seen in Table 10 below. Table 10. Summary of empirical findings referenced with relevant publications (based on own data collection and existing in-text citations as listed in the Bibliography) Themes Subthemes Relevant publications and/or theories

Sentimental Involvement

( - ) - Cognitive constructivism (Piaget, 1976) - Motivation, participation, social and cultural (Badia and Iglesias, 2019)

Flipped Classroom Design

( - ) - Based on the conceptual model from Mukherjee & Bleakney (2017)

Participants perception

Communication - Cultural Constructivism by Hutchison (2006)

Technology - Learning Management System (Fulton, 2012) - Technologies in the Flipped Classroom (Mukherjee et al., 2017) - Learning Management System and ICT (Melzer, 2019)

Learning Experience

- Learning outcomes and goals (Havemann, Charles, Sherman, Rodgers and Barros, 2019) - Social constructivism (Hrastinski, 2019)

The following subchapters will thematically present the discussion of this research project. The discussion is based on the collected empirical data and relevant literature and guided by the above-mentioned table. A comprehensive conclusion will be provided in the next chapter.

39

5.2. Sentimental Involvement This subchapter refers to the sentimental involvement of the participants in the flipped classroom that was examined as a case study. The participants were asked to comment if they consider themselves as active participants of the flipped classroom, wherein out of seven participants, four strongly agreed, one somewhat agreed, one felt neutral and two somewhat disagreed and disagreed respectively. The weighted result from this question suggested that the participants could be considered as relatively active in the flipped classroom session, which is confirmed the claim made by Piaget (1976) when describing the cognitive constructivism and the flipped classroom as part of that educational theory as visualized in Figure 6. Badia and Iglesias (2019) claimed in a more recent study that participants of the flipped classroom are more invested and motivated to participate. Though this study did not specifically ask the participants to provide a point of comparison, the participants stated that they have a higher level of motivation and engagement, which suggested that the flipped classroom bears an advantage of sentimental involvement compared to other methods. Similarly, the participants commented that the content is presented more appealing through the means of discussion with peers, which is identical to what Piaget (1976) claimed in his initial argument about cognitive constructivism theory. Furthermore, the participants stated that the option to actively contribute, higher motivation to prepare in advance and the added benefit to learning from others are comparable to the claim from Badia et al. (2019) who argue that participants in flipped classroom courses have a higher degree of involvement and motivation compared to a traditional classroom, where a teacher would hold a lecture. Nevertheless, the participants also stated limitations that affected their sentimental involvement in the flipped classroom course. The limitations and challenges are related to less flexibility in a noisy environment. The participant commented that in order to actively engage and involve in the flipped classroom, it needs a quiet environment with no distractions and background noises, otherwise it is impossible to contribute, as it would disrupt the communication flow of others. Another limitation that was stated by the participants was the initial hesitation from participants to involve themselves in the discussion. One participant made a suitable claim that described the limitation in a very effective manner.

“It needs several sessions. It takes time to build that base and therefore you need a series of meetings [...] people need to know each other and feel comfortable [...]”.

This key finding of the empirical data collection was not mentioned in any scientific publications, even though Piaget (1976) claimed in a related manner that constructivism theory requires a certain degree of trust amongst the participants. In another study about distance learning and online education, Dziuban et al. (2018) claimed that the lack of socialization in distance learning could be a potential factor that affects the students learning outcomes. 5.3. Flipped Classroom Design This subchapter aims to provide an illustrative description of the flipped classroom based on the participants’ perception and direct comparison to the flipped classroom model designed by Mukherjee et al. (2017) as visualized earlier in Figure 5 of this research project. The

40

participants were asked to describe the flipped classroom course based on their own experience and to provide a direct comparison between their experience and the theoretical models that were shown to them during the interview. The theoretical model claimed by Mukherjee et al. (2017) described three individual stages of the flipped classroom, starting from pre-class with a fundamental topic orientation. The second stage was labeled as during-class, which referred to the discussion amongst peers that was facilitated by a teacher. The last stage was considered as post-class, which referred to performance assessment [by the teacher], practice [of the course content] and feedback (Mukherjee et al., 2017). All participants fully recognized the second stage, during class, of the theoretical model and concurred that it involved the active discussion amongst students that was guided and facilitated by the teacher. The first stage was perceived by the majority of participants similarly with the theoretical model, which refers to topic orientation during pre-class. The participants described this stage as independent learning in advance of the second stage of the flipped classroom. Particularly, the participants liked the option to pause, rewind and re-watch the content, which was described by Mukherjee et al. (2017) as a primary advantage for students that seek flexibility with their education. While there is a consensus between the literature and participants on the first and second stages of the flipped classroom, most of the participants did not recognize the third stage of the flipped classroom. The aspect of practice as described by Mukherjee et al. (2017) was confirmed by participants through the means of group projects that were implemented as deliverables for the flipped classroom course. However, none of the participants agreed with the assessment aspect or performance evaluation that was described by Mukherjee et al. (2017). In a related study, Valdehita, Plata and Merodio (2017) claimed that assessment of student performance in distance-education needs to occur in regular patterns and not only at the end of the program [course], which could be an explanation why the participants failed to recognize this aspect in the third stage of the model. 5.4. Communication Communication and findings related to the interaction between participants (peer-to-peer), as well as student to teacher, discovered two types of communication; one-way communication as well as two-way communication, which were depending on the respective stage of the flipped classroom. The findings and analysis of the empirical data revealed that the participants perceived different communication patterns based on the stage of the flipped classroom and the corresponding party they would communicate with as shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Visualization of communication pattern in the flipped classroom (based on own empirical data collection)

Perceived communication patterns in the flipped classroom Stage I Stage II Stage III Pre-Class During-Class Post-Class

Teacher – Student: (Passive one-way) (Limited two-way) (No communication) Student – Student: (No communication) (Active two-way) (Limited two-way)

41

Piaget (1976) described the education theory related to cognitive constructivism as active engagement amongst peers and knowledge creation through participation. Piaget (1976) further argued that the students are at the center of the learning environment. The analyzed findings have shown that the claim is valid, however, each stage of the flipped classroom entailed a different communication style and pattern, which was described by the participants. The participants stated that the communication between peers (peer-to-peer) during the pre-class is non-existent, which was similarly argued by Mukherjee et al. (2017) who claimed that the first stage of the flipped classroom serves for the topic orientation and interaction amongst students is limited during this stage. Similarly, the participants stated that communication with the teacher is passive during the first stage and mostly relates to pre-recorded lectures through the Learning Management System, Moodle that is. The communication in the second stage, during class, involved mostly student-to-student interaction and communication and the teacher remained in a passive role for the most part of the discussion. Some of the participants stated that the discussion amongst peers was enriching and assisted them to advance their knowledge as similarly claimed by Piaget (1976), however, it was also stated that the initial sessions were less interactive and students needed to overcome an initial barrier to achieve active communication amongst peers. This could be explained with the claim made by Hutchison (2006) who argued that constructivism learning depends on the cultural context and initial hesitation and reservation could be caused by the underlying fact of cultural differences and not knowing the opinion of the others yet. The communication in the third stage was perceived as non-existent between student and teacher and limited between students as it mostly related to the post-class assignments that were carried out as mandatory group assignments. 5.5. Technology Information and Communication Technology played a critical role to provide an effective learning environment for the participants. It can be considered as the enabler for the flipped classroom concept for distance students. There was a consensus that the video conferencing application Zoom was primarily used for the during class stage of the flipped classroom and the participants perceived Zoom as beneficial to their learning based on the ease of use and no barriers connecting to the class and with their peers. For content sharing, Google Suites applications were utilized and the participants stated that Google Slides, Google Documents, Google Drive, and Google Hangout were used due to the ability to access them easily from any remote location.

“It [Google Suites] gives the possibility to work wherever you are and whenever you have the time since we are distance-students [...]

Lastly, the Learning Management System that was used in this flipped classroom course was Moodle and students stated that it was utilized only to access recorded lectures for the pre-class and to submit assignments after the post-class. Melzer (2019) claimed that LMS is intended to offer a one-stop solution for students and teachers alike and enable them to access information and communicate on the same platform, though none of the participants preferred to communicate through the LMS platform with peers or the teacher. Based on the participants’ comments that Zoom and Google Suites is utilized due to its ease of use and remote access, it could offer a possible explanation as to why Moodle is not utilized for that

42

same purpose. Fulton (2012) and Melzer (2019) both described the facilitation of LMS as convenient to use and easy to access platform to connect students. It facilitates to initiate the knowledge transfer, however, based on the findings that none of the students preferred to use Moodle for communication purposes could suggest that this particular LMS lacked particular elements that would make it more convenient and easy to use for communication. On the basis of the theoretical model that was adapted from Mukherjee et al. (2017) with the empirical findings, which ICT was used in the flipped classroom, below Figure 12 was developed. Figure 12 presents the respective ICTs that were used in the respective stages of the flipped classroom sessions.

Figure 12. Usage of ICT in the flipped classroom (based on own empirical data collection) 5.6. Learning Experience The learning experience in this context refers to any subjective and peculiar experience perceived by the participants in the flipped classroom, which can not be allocated to the categories that were introduced earlier or justifies an own category, though the perceived learning experience added value to the overall objective of the study as it allowed further insight into the perception of the flipped classroom by the students. Havemann, Charles, Sherman, Rodgers and Barros (2019) argued that the primary advantage of the flipped classroom concept was improved learning outcomes for the students, which was confirmed by all participants. Through the means of the semi-structured interview, it allowed identifying that the claimed improvement of learning outcomes for students is mostly related to the means of discussion that is taking place through Information and Communication Technologies in the virtual classroom, which represents the second stage of the flipped classroom. Another finding that could possibly share more insight into the claim of Havemann et al. (2019) was the fact that students were allowed to study the material in advance in order to prepare basis, which is fundamental to the discussion stage according to the participants. The flipped classroom concept, which is dependent on the support of ICT, allowed the participants to pause, rewind, and re-watch the material in order to prepare for the discussion stage at their own pace. Hrastinski (2019) argued that social constructivism seeks to absorb knowledge gained from more knowledgeable peers and merge it with one’s own belief in order to absorb more

ICT that were used in the flipped classroom Stage I Stage II Stage III Pre Class During Class Post Class

LMS (Moodle): Yes - - Google Suites: - - Yes Zoom: - Yes - WhatsApp: - - Yes Skype: - - Yes Online Library: Yes - Yes

43

information and respectively increase the knowledge. The participants’ comments with regard to the claim of Hrastinski (2019) confirmed that instant feedback from others helped them to achieve their learning goals and foster the knowledge transfer, while others stated that once they overcame the initial barrier to know each other, the virtual discussion of the flipped classroom was the most beneficial factor in their learning experience. 5.7. Students’ positive perception with initial barriers To summarize the discussion, it can be stated that based on the initial argument of Piaget (1976) with regards to cognitive constructivism and the associated characteristics, the participants confirmed that the knowledge transfer that through discussion-based sessions helped them to achieve better learning outcomes and was perceived as beneficial in their learning experience as initially claimed through another study by Badia et al. (2019). The classroom design was perceived similarly to the design of Mukherjee et al. (2017), though the participants could not clearly identify the post-class stage of the flipped classroom. Instead the findings revealed that the discussion in the second stage was the most beneficial factor in advancing their knowledge, which was positively influenced by the pre-reading material from stage one. The fact that students were required to study the material in advance for the discussion lead to a higher motivation to learn, which was perceived as positive. While the communication was claimed as an active two-way communication amongst peers during the discussion, a shortcoming was the initial hurdle to speak out and it took few sessions to overcome that barrier and achieve a pleasant study environment, which could be culturally related according to Hutchison (2006). Based on the discussed findings, a simplified version of the flipped classroom concept was designed as seen in Figure 13 below. While the below figure recognizes the three stages of the flipped classroom similarly to Mukherjee et al. (2017), the primary difference is the interpretation of the process. As shown in Figure 13, the stages in the flipped classroom are viewed as repetitive rather than a linear view. The phases of (1) preparation, (2) discussion and (3) reflection are recurring stages that reflect a series of flipped classroom sessions in order to maximize the knowledge transfer of students.

Figure 13. Simplified conceptual model of the FC (based on own empirical data collection) In the following chapter, the key results of the discussion were summarized in order to form conclusions of the research project, which were the basis for the research contributions and recommendations for future research.

Pre-Class During Class Post-Class

Prepare

Discuss

Reflect

44

6. Conclusion This chapter concludes the degree project and presents the conclusions as the result of this research. Furthermore knowledge contributions and recommendations for future research are stated in the following subchapters. 6.1. Conclusions and Contributions It was initially stated that the higher education sector was transforming. In particular the methods of how education was delivered to students, which was largely driven by the increasing size of participants in the physical classroom. This was paired with the need to improve the methods of how content is delivered to students in higher education. One method that was identified to bear various advantages to support the educational transformation was the flipped classroom concept, which is part of the constructivism educational theory that focuses on the students as the center of the learning environment. This contemporary learning method was comprehensively supported by Information and Communication Technologies and can be carried out for campus-based students, distance-students, or a mix of both groups. The conceptual and technical descriptions of the flipped classroom concept have been comprehensively researched by the scientific community with various publications that stated the advantages and disadvantages of the flipped classroom learning concept. However the primary source for data collection when the flipped classroom was analyzed was from the teachers' viewpoint or third party standpoint and lacked the perception of the primary beneficiary of this educational method: the students. This research project addressed the identified knowledge gap and collected empirical data from current participants of the flipped classroom in a second-cycle higher education program at the Department of Informatics. The data that was collected through this qualitative research aimed to analyze how students perceive the usefulness and challenges of the flipped classroom concept in their educational journey. While the previous paragraphs reiterated the objective of this research, the initial research question shall be repeated in the following before attempting to extensively answering it:

How do distance-students in higher education perceive benefits and challenges with the technology-enhanced flipped classroom concept as part of their educational journey as opposed to the traditional classroom teaching method?

The thematic analysis revealed findings that allowed us to gain a closer look at how students perceived this teaching method as part of their distance-studies. The findings revealed that the general sentiment towards this teaching method was positive and the participants stated that they would prefer the flipped classroom concept compared to traditional lecture-based classrooms. Furthermore, the students claimed that the flipped classroom concept had a positive effect on their learning and helped them to maintain a higher level of motivation and drive throughout the duration of the course compared to lecture-based classrooms, wherein the students are the passive recipient of information. The participants argued that the primary reason for the higher level of motivation was the conversation-based discussion that is the second stage of the flipped classroom concept. The discussion allowed them to actively contribute and influence the direction of the discussion. Another positive perception towards the flipped classroom concept was the ability to pause, rewind, re-watch the lecture-based

45

concept that proceeded the discussion-based session, and was identified as the first stage of the flipped classroom. Information and Communication Technology arguably supported the gain in popularity of this teaching method and enabled participants to engage in an active discussion from a remote-location in the second stage of the flipped classroom as well as in the third and final stage of the flipped classroom, which was identified as another advantage of the flipped classroom concept. The ability to actively influence the outcome of the discussion and to benefit from the opinion of others was claimed by the participants as advantages to the flipped classroom, which is the basis for cognitive constructivism learning, though there were shortcomings that were identified and addressed in this research project. It was claimed that the flipped classroom concept would not offer value to the participants if it were arranged as a one-off class or limited series. Instead, participants claimed that the flipped classroom concept requires a series of meetings, wherein the initial meetings were perceived as more passive due to the fact that participants were still overcoming the initial barrier to actively communicate while getting to know each other and build a level of trust that enabled a more open discussion. Furthermore, another limitation of the flipped classroom that was identified was the ability to actively contribute within a noisy environment. The participants described themselves as relatively active contributors in the discussion-based sessions and appreciated the ability to join these sessions from remote locations, though it was addressed that the ability to contribute actively requires a quiet environment with no surrounding external noises as it would disturb own learning and disrupt the discussion of others as claimed by the participants. The findings pertaining to the initial research question allowed answering the research question that the participants generally have a positive perception towards the flipped classroom concept and the research identified several advantages and presented the usefulness of how students perceived this method of teaching. Nevertheless, there were shortcomings that need to be taken into account when considering this method of teaching as it would not be recommended for a one-off session or limited series of sessions. Furthermore, another main finding was that the students need to be made aware that a quiet and suitable work environment would be required in order to actively engage in the during-class discussion. The constructivism educational theory identified the students in the center of the learning environment. The findings of this study agreed with the claim, however, the importance of the teacher as guide and facilitator of the discussion was again highlighted. In particular, at the early stage of the flipped classroom, the teacher was needed to spark the dialogue. As the course progressed, the during-class discussions matured over time and the involvement of the teacher as facilitator was less needed. 6.2. Recommendations for Future Research Based on the empirical findings of this research as well as the conclusions that were drawn, it would add additional value to expand the scope of this study to include participants from different educational backgrounds in order to validate the results on a larger scale. Another perspective that would add value could be to conduct quantitative study. This study would help to quantify the findings of the participants on how the flipped classroom helped them to attain a higher level of motivation and drive throughout the study. Furthermore, it could investigate how it assisted them to achieve the learning outcomes through the discussion-based knowledge transfer of the flipped classroom.

46

References Abeysekera, L. and Dawson, P., 2015. Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), pp.1-14. Badia, A. and Iglesias, S., 2019. The science teacher identity and the use of technology in the classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), pp.532-541. Baepler, P., Walker, J.D. and Driessen, M., 2014. It's not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, pp.227-236. Bain, J.D., 2003. Slowing the pendulum: Should we preserve some aspects of instructivism?. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning (pp. 1382-1388). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Bishop, J.L. and Verleger, M.A., 2013, June. The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE national conference proceedings, Atlanta, GA (Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 1-18). Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N. and Terry, G., 2019. Thematic analysis. Handbook of research methods in social sciences, pp.843-860. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O. and Kerres, M., 2020. Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), p.2. Capone, R., De Caterina, P. and Mazza, G., 2017. Blended learning, flipped classroom and virtual environment: challenges and opportunities for the 21st century students. In Proceedings of EDULEARN17 Conference (pp. 10478-10482). Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. and Kennan, M.A., 2018. The methodological landscape Information systems and knowledge. Research Methods, p.127. Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications, pp.34-72. Crosslin, M., 2016. From instructivism to connectivism: theoretical underpinnings of MOOCs. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning, 3(1), p.6. Davies, R.S., Dean, D.L. and Ball, N., 2013. Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), pp.563-580. Dewey, J., 1933. Philosophy and civilization. Dewey, J.W., Wald, D.J., Quitoriano, V., and Dengler, L.A., 1999. Utilization of the Internet for rapid community intensity maps. Seismological Research Letters, 70(6), pp.680-697. Dziuban, C., Graham, C.R., Moskal, P.D., Norberg, A. and Sicilia, N., 2018. Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), 15(1), p.3. Fletcher, A.J., 2017. Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. International journal of social research methodology, 20(2), pp.181-194. Fleury, S.C., Bentley, M. and Garrison, J., 2007. Critical constructivism for teaching and learning in a democratic society. Journal of thought, 42(3-4), pp.9-22. Fleury, S.C., Garrison, J. and Désautels, J., 1998. Critical-constructivism and the sociopolitical agenda. Constructivism and education, pp.253-270. Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), 39(8), 12–17. Garrison, D.R. and Kanuka, H., 2004. Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), pp.95-105.

47

Graham, C.R., 2006. Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs, pp.3-21. Griffee, D.T., 2005. Research Tips: Interview Data Collection. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), pp.36-37. Goldie, J.G.S., 2016. Connectivism: A knowledge learning theory for the digital age?. Journal of Information Technology Education, 38(10), pp.1064-1069. Guest, G., MacQueen, K.M. and Namey, E.E., 2011. Applied thematic analysis. Sage Publications, pp.37-42. Han, F. and Ellis, R.A., 2019. Identifying consistent patterns of quality learning discussions in blended learning. Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), 9(1), pp.12-19. Hart, C., 2018. Doing a literature review: Releasing the research imagination. Sage, pp.19-21 Havemann, L., Charles, E., Sherman, S., Rodgers, S. and Barros, J., 2019. A multitude of modes: considering ‘blended learning’in context. Herbert, C., Velan, G.M., Pryor, W.M. and Kumar, R.K., 2017. A model for the use of blended learning in large group teaching sessions. BMC medical education, 17(1), p.197. Hrastinski, S., 2019. What do we mean by blended learning?. TechTrends, 63(5), pp.564-569. Hutchison, C.B., 2006. Cultural constructivism: the confluence of cognition, knowledge creation, multiculturalism, and teaching. Intercultural Education, 17(3), pp.301-310. Jin, S. and Shang, Y., 2019, October. Basic Research on Blended Teaching Mode in Colleges and Universities. In 2019 International Conference on Advanced Education Research and Modern Teaching (AERMT 2019). Atlantis Press. Karpouza, E. and Emvalotis, A., 2019. Exploring the teacher-student relationship in graduate education: a constructivist grounded theory. Teaching in higher education, 24(2), pp.121-140. Kim, M.K., Kim, S.M., Khera, O. and Getman, J., 2014. The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, pp.37-50. Leung, L., 2015. Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of family medicine and primary care, 4(3), p.324. Li, M., Lai, C.W. and Szeto, W.M., 2019, May. Whiteboard Animations for Flipped Classrooms in a Common Core Science General Education Course. In Fifth International Conference on Higher Education Advances, p.127-133. Lundin, M., Rensfeldt, A.B., Hillman, T., Lantz-Andersson, A. and Peterson, L., 2018. Higher education dominance and siloed knowledge: a systematic review of flipped classroom research. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), p.20. Majchrzak, A., Markus, M.L. and Wareham, J., 2016. Designing for digital transformation: Lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT and societal challenges. MIS quarterly, 40(2), pp.267-277. McLaughlin, J.E., Roth, M.T., Glatt, D.M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C.A., Griffin, L.M., Esserman, D.A. and Mumper, R.J., 2014. The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in professions school. Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), 9(1), 89(2), pp.236- 243. Melzer, P., 2019. A conceptual framework for task and tool personalisation in IS education. In A Conceptual Framework for Personalised Learning (pp. 47-76). Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. Mitchell, A., Petter, S. and Harris, A.L., 2017. Learning by doing: Twenty successful active learning exercises for information systems courses. Journal of Information technology education: Innovations in Practice, 16(1), pp.21-46. Mukherjee, A. and Bleakney, S., 2017. Redesigning an Introduction to Informaton Systems Course for Scalable Active Learning in Online and Blended Environments. In Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). Association For Information Systems. Myers, G.E., 1997. Pragmatism and introspective psychology.

48

Nahar, K. and Chowdhury, R., 2019, December. Effectiveness of flipped classroom model in distance learning. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference for the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE 2019). Australasian Association of Engineering Education. Oeste, S., Lehmann, K., Janson, A. and Leimeister, J.M., 2014. Flipping the IS Classroom- Theory-Driven Design for Large-Scale Lectures. HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik. Olaniyi, N.E., 2020. Threshold concepts: designing a format for the flipped classroom as an active learning technique for crossing the threshold. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), p.2. O'Flaherty, J. and Phillips, C., 2015. The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The internet and Higher Education, 25, pp.85-95. Pavlović, J. and Maksić, S., 2019. Implicit Theories of Creativity in Higher Education: A Constructivist Study. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 32(3), pp.254-273. Piaget, J., 1976. Piaget’s theory. In Piaget and his school (pp. 11-23). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Piskunova, L., Starostova, L. and Yankov, I., 2018. The architecture of constructivism: the creative transformation of aesthetic codes and narratives. Creativity Studies, 11(1), pp.56-69. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), p.879. Porcaro, D., 2011. Applying constructivism in instructivist learning cultures. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal. Runeson, P., Host, M., Rainer, A. and Regnell, B., 2012. Case study research in software program: Advantages and limitation of blended education. International Journal of engineering: Guidelines and examples. John Wiley & Sons. Saltan, F., 2017. Blended learning experience of students participating pedagogical formation program: Advantages and limitation of blended education. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(1), pp.63-73. Silverman, D. ed., 2016. Qualitative research. Sage Publications, pp.79-92. Steffe, L.P. and Gale, J.E. eds., 1995. Constructivism in education (p. 159). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Suhre, C., Winnips, K., de Boer, V., Valdivia, P. and Beldhuis, H., 2019, July. Students’ experiences with the use of a social annotation tool to improve learning in flipped classrooms. In HEAD'19. 5th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (pp. 955-964). Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València. Thai, N.T.T., De Wever, B. and Valcke, M., 2017. The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best “blend” of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, pp.113-126. Valdehita, R.E., Plata, R.B. and Merodio, J.A.M., 2017. Educational technology in flipped course design. The International journal of engineering education, 33(4), pp.1199-1212. Von Glasersfeld, E., 1984. An introduction to radical constructivism. The invented reality, 1740. Von Glasersfeld, E., 2013. Radical constructivism. Routledge. Vygotsky, L., 1978. Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), pp.34-41. Wee, B.V. and Banister, D., 2016. How to write a literature review paper?. Transport Reviews, 36(2), pp.278-288. Yin, R.K., 2017. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications. Zainuddin, Z. and Perera, C.J., 2019. Exploring students’ competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped classroom pedagogical model. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), pp.115-126.

49

Appendices Appendix 1. An example how the literature was analyzed in the review process Feature of the paper Author’s comments

Author(s) Bishop, J.L. & Verleger, M.A.

Year of publication June 2013

Article’s title The flipped classroom: A survey of the research published for ASEE national conference proceedings, Atlanta, GA

Motivation for the research / targeted research gap

Recent advances in technology and in ideology have unlocked entirely new directions for education research. Mounting pressure from increasing tuition costs and free, online course offerings is opening discussion and catalyzing change in the physical classroom.

Research question(s) / objective(s)

Review of effectiveness for flipped classroom amongst existing studies to examine similarities or differences.

Concepts and theories used Narrative literature review

Methods, data collection and analysis techniques

Narrative literature review during the month of June 2012 revealed 24 studies related to the flipped classroom

Key findings One that has examined student performance throughout a semester. While the results from this study are encouraging, this is not sufficient evidence to warrant generalization far beyond that situation. Further, the solution was very specific, rather than being based on established principles to guide adaptation. Thus, additional research is needed to examine the influence of flipped classroom instruction on objective learning outcomes.

Knowledge contribution / Filled knowledge gap

Provide up to date literature review and comprehensive comparison of available literature pertaining to flipped classroom concept

Limitation(s) of the research / Future research

While 24 publications were compared, it is difficult to quantifiably compare the results since different parameters were used in these publications.

Own reflections Article contained good definition on flipped classroom definition, provided a lot of academic reference for further review and critically viewed the flipped classroom concept.

50

Appendix 2. Interview questionnaire and Informed Consent for the participants Disclaimer: The following questions are an extract of the question catalog that has been developed based on the reviewed literature, theoretical framework and observational data that were collected as a pre-study. The participants were given a copy of the below questions 48 hours prior to their individual interview along with the information about their informed consent, confidentially and voluntary participation as seen below.

1. Demographics a. Gender: (1) Male, (2) Female, (3) Others, (4) Prefer not to answer b. Age Group: (1) 20 years or below, (2) 21 – 29 years, (3), 30 – 39 years, (4) 40 years

or above, (5) Prefer not to answer c. Your location: City & Country d. Educational Level: (1) Bachelor’s degree, (2) Master’s degree, (3) Others, please

specify, (4) Prefer not to answer e. Tuition paying student: (1) Yes, (2) No, (3) Prefer not to answer

2. Profile Questions a. Were you aware that the course would be conducted as flipped classroom before you

started the course? A = Yes, B = No

b. Would you describe yourself as active participant in the flipped classroom sessions? 1 = Disagree, 2 = Somewhat disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Somewhat agree, 5 = Agree

c. Do you prefer the flipped classroom classes or traditional classroom teaching and why?

3. General a. How would you describe the flipped classroom sessions in your words based on your

experience? b. Could you tell me about your experience or knowledge with the flipped classroom

concept before you started the course? c. Where do you see the differences between the flipped classroom and traditional

classroom teaching?

4. Theory a. How would you describe the communication between the students and teachers in the

flipped classroom sessions? b. Does the interaction between teacher and student differ between pre-class, during

class and post-class and how? c. Based on your earlier response about how you describe the flipped classroom, how

does it differ from the model that I sent you and where is the overlap?

5 Technical a. Can you describe the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) that you

use in pre-class, during class and post-class of your flipped classroom course? b. Which aspect of the ICT works well and which aspect could be improved? c. What kind of tool would add additional value and why? d. How would you describe the communication with your peers (peer-to-peer) during

class and outside class for the flipped classroom course?

51

Informed Consent and Conceptual Model Dear fellow Distance-Student, Thank you for agreeing to voluntarily participate in the interview as part of my empirical study for my degree project – your contribution is deemed very valuable for me! Conceptual Model of the Flipped Classroom (Pre-Class, During-Class, Post-Class)

Source: Figure 5; adapted from Mukherjee, A. and Bleakney, S., 2017. Redesigning an Introduction to Information Systems Course for Scalable Active Learning in Online and Blended Environments. In Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). Association For Information Systems. Through the means of this information sheet, I would like to share a conceptual model of the flipped classroom with you, which we will use for part of our discussion. There is no need to specifically prepare anything for the interview in advance. Furthermore, I would like to inform you about a few practical issues with regards to ethical consideration: Informed Consent:

• Your participation in the interview is voluntary and you can stop the interview at any given point.

• You have the right to request a withdrawal from the study and your respective answers at any point in time.

• The results are solely used for academic and scientific purposes. There is a possibility that the results from the thesis will result in a journal or conference publication.

• Your participation and responses will be handled with the utmost confidentiality. • The interview will be audio-recorded and thereafter scripted upon, which you have the

right to gain a copy of the script and/or recording at any point in time.

Thank you again for your participation!