Flipped Classroom, Flipped Teaching and Flipped Learning in the Foreign/Second Language Post–Secondary Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term “flipped classroom”, coined in 2007, represents a pedagogy aligned with long-established principles of student-centered learning. Over the last two decades, the flipped classroom has been adopted by instructors across a range of disciplines, from primary to post-secondary settings. During its development, the characteristics of the flipped classroom have evolved, as have the terminology used to reference it, leading practitioners and researchers to now address it as flipped classroom, flipped teaching or flipped learning. In this article, these terms will be used interchangeably. The article will examine the foundations of flipped learning, discuss its roots in learner-centered pedagogy, trace its development over the last two decades, profile its characteristics, and examine the feedback on its effectiveness and challenges as provided by flipped learning instructors and researchers. An attempt will be made to answer the following four questions. Where does flipped learning fit on the continuum of learner-centered pedagogies? How have educators responded, both positively and negatively, to the flipped learning/teaching approach? How has flipped learning been implemented in the foreign/second language (FL/L2) classroom? What are some considerations and recommendations for FL/L2 instructors contemplating using this approach in the FL/L2 post-secondary context? Finally, some suggestions will be made regarding next steps in research on flipped learning.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".