by Jonathan Tang

Is the flipped classroom being talked about too much? Is it overrated? Is it but a fad? Is it totally innovative and novel as to warrant unprecedented enthusiasm? Is there too much talk about what flipping is and too little about what it isn’t? Is technology-enhanced flipping dominating discourses on the flipped methodology to the effect that flipping without the infusion of technology is not considered flipping? How does one find the right blend among the different modes? Has flipping become more of an ideology than a methodology? Has it been applied with due awareness and understanding? Has it been abused, and how/when does one know? Is it hijacking due focus on, and deflecting attention away from, pedagogy? Does flipping truly democratize the classroom? Might neoliberal framings of the self-responsible learner engendered by discourses on flipping neglect cultural and social values as well as individual pre-conditions? Don’t the relationships, discussions, and experiences, physically and in real time, matter (as much) anymore?

When students say they enjoy the ‘flip’ experience, what is it that they truly celebrate — substantive learning, novelty, or fewer class contact hours? Can students be rightly assumed to know how to work with educational technology used to enhance flipped classrooms just because they are so-called a tech-savvy generation? Is there too much spotlight on the flipping imperative but too little on its impact?

All of the above questions represent my problem: that I’m not yet convinced about the flipped classroom, especially in regard to language/communication teaching, and I’m feeling a tad guilty about being such a cold blanket. But the good news is, I’m open to being convinced, and joining the global fetishizing about the flipped classroom. I just need more time I guess. There have been moments at least, when I wished there was some form of flipping so that I didn’t have to be held captive audience in my research methodology class when I was a graduate student — the lecturer was making us all take turns to read aloud his Powerpoint slides.

My lack of enthusiasm with flipping has come from practical experience and my acquaintance with the literature. First, from a practical standpoint, I’ve not taught on a course in which I can candidly say that flipping has brought about substantive learning to students. In one instance, flipping was used as an excuse, and indeed abused, to cram more content into the already overcrowded curriculum; in another, to impart time-consuming ‘background’ concepts that were rarely brought to the fore to be developed and practised with feedback in the face-to-face (f2f) sessions that followed the e-lectures.

Second, from a theoretical standpoint, I’ve been reading around and about the flipped English language/communication classroom but I’m still waiting to be wow-ed. In a flipped English classroom intervention on Taiwanese senior high school students’ reading comprehension and information literacy skills, higher pre-post test scores were reported in the experimental group, leading the researchers to theorize that “because the flipped classroom can ‘speak the language’ of today’s students, and make use of short videos, this may promote students’ engagement and also increase their learning motivation” (Huang & Hong, 2016). In another study to integrate “flip teaching” into an EFL classroom in a Taiwanese university, the researcher reported that “the structure of learning materials, augmented by the use of WebQuests, had a positive impact on how students perceived the learning environment and engaged in the learning process, but how strong the impact was and whether it directly influenced student learning outcomes was difficult to tell” (Hung, 2015). Yet in another attempt to use Moodle and Flipboard to teach business English to undergraduates in a Slovenian university, blended learning was reported to provide a fresh departure from traditional textbook-based instruction, decentralize the teacher/teaching, and promote lifelong learning, independent learning and other 21st century skills (Riznar, 2016). On the whole thus, flipping does seem to be a generally positive experience. But what about the impact? Shouldn’t we be concerned?

I do not have an easy solution to the problem that this reflection set out to contemplate. But I would like to conclude by examining a few assumptions that often underlie research on the flipped classroom, by way of more questions.

Is speaking the language of today’s students – via technology – a surefire way to engage and motivate them? Have we placed too much confidence and faith in students’ savviness about educational technology? Are we sure they know how to work with media in education just because they are a tech-savvy generation? (Tay, 2014) Could turning to technology also suggest that educators have lost their game and run out of ways to engage and motivate their students? How good are changes in learner perception and feelings of novelty engendered by the flipped classroom as evidence of impact? How much faith can we put in students’ perceptions, self-reports, and checked boxes in surveys and questionnaires? How secure or susceptible to change are those perceptions? Aren’t they fleeting? Don’t feelings of novelty wear off? What then is left after the novelty wears off? How long can that novelty last given that every course is eagerly seeking to jump on the ‘flip’ bandwagon? Does flipping the classroom always mean democratizing it? Is democratization always empowering? Might it disguise impoverished curriculum and subpar teaching? Are 21st century skills the intended learning outcomes in courses that adopt the ‘flip’ approach? What about learning gains in the subject of the curriculum?

References

Huang, Y. N., & Hong, Z. R. The effects of a flipped English classroom intervention on students’ information and communication technology and English reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 175–193.

Hung, H-T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.

Riznar, I. (2016). Moodle and Flipboard in business English language teaching/learning. Proceedings of the International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship, 1122-1132. Zagreb: Centar za istrazivanje i razvoj upravljanja.

Tay, L. C. (2014). Content knowledge, pedagogy and technology in Singapore classrooms: an approach to integration and development. Unpublished EdD dissertation. National Institute of Education, Singapore.