Authors | Scope of study | Scope with respect to impact of teachers | Methodology | Type of analysis |
---|---|---|---|---|
Kim et al. (2014) | Design principles for flipped classroom derived from three case studies | The role of teachers is changed in FC to become that of initiator, facilitator | Mixed methods: Surveys, interviews with students, instructor reflections, document analysis. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, correlation coefficient analysis | Three classes (engineering, sociology, humanities). 115 students. 3 instructors each with a unique implementation of flipped classroom |
Karabulut-Ilgu et al. (2018) | Systematic review of flipped learning in engineering education | Teachers’ role is discussed. Biggest challenge: heavy workload both before and during class. Student resistance | Descriptive statistics on number of articles by year, number of articles by journal, theoretical frameworks applied, effect evaluation results, benefits and challenges | Systematic review. 62 articles from between 2000 and 2015. Details about articles selection provided. Summaries to extract knowledge |
Akçayır and Akçayır (2018) | Systematic review of flipped classroom. Focus on advantages, challenges and chosen activities | Teachers’ new role. Challenges for teachers: time consuming, difficult to manage and difficult to plan activities | Descriptive statistics on number of articles by year, learner types (Higher education 80%). Categories for advantages, challenges, and activities | Systematic review. 71 articles from between 1980–2016 Summaries and categorizations to extract knowledge |
DeLozier and Rhodes (2017) | Review article. Ideas and recommendations for practice. Focus on various elements of flipped classroom out-of and in-class | Teacher’ role in combination with different activities. Mentions differences in instructor implementation | Discussions on out-of-class lectures, in-class activities, pair-and-share activities, student presentations, Active learning with the flipped classroom | Review article. References from 1976 to 2015. In total 90 references |
Hwang et al. (2015) | A theoretical study on seamless flipped learning (SFL) | Elaboration on the new role of teachers as facilitators. Introduces five success criteria for teachers’ implementation of SFL | To derive recommendations based on theoretical considerations | Introduction of SFL model. Not exclusively for higher education |
Ghadiri (2014) | Case study reporting from developing and implementing blended learning on one course within STEM | Approach very demanding for faculty. New role. Discusses what teachers can learn from various elements of blended learning and flipped classroom | Descriptive comparisons of grade and pass rate outcomes from own implementation of BL. Histograms. ANOVA. Linear multiple regression | Cohort from 2012 to 2014. An intro course in ‘Circuit Analysis’ Three classes of 50, 78, 75 students respectively |
Zou et al. (2020) | Systematic review of flipped language classroom | Teachers’ perceptions are mentioned. A section on implications for teachers | Classifications. Focus on course elements, learning tools (pre-class, in-class and after-class). Evaluation methods and effects of flipped classroom | Systematic review. Based on 34 articles from 2015 to 2019 in 14 different journals. Mostly higher education |