The Flipped Classroom Impact in Grammar Class on EFL Saudi Secondary School Students’ Performances and Attitudes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The aim of this study was to apply the flipped classroom strategy in teaching English grammar to examine its impact on secondary school students’ performances, perceptions, and attitudes toward learning English independently. The researcher implemented the flipped classroom strategy by selecting videos based on the students’ textbook and uploading those videos on the Edmodo site before each lesson to provide opportunities for active learning interactions. The students of the experimental group (n = 20) were required to watch the videos to learn by themselves and to come to class prepared to ask for clarification, if needed. They also practiced what they had learned under the teacher’s supervision by completing collaborative and competitive tasks in groups or pairs. Meanwhile, the control group students (n = 23) received in-class only traditional teaching. They learned the grammatical lessons without the help of any videos. The statistical analysis of the post-test results showed that adopting the flipped classroom strategy appeared to play a role in enhancing the students’ grammar performances, as the mean score of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group, but this difference was not statistically significant. The students’ responses to a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews indicated that their attitudes’ towards using the flipped classroom strategy in the EFL class were positive.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it