The Flipped Classroom: High School Student Engagement Through 21st Century Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative study is to document the experiences of students who participated in a flipped classroom during a Grade 11 Modern World History and a Grade 11 Biology course. An abridged literature review revealed the flipped classroom provides enriched opportunities for collaborative learning and for greater teacher-student interaction; however, during the homework phase, some students are not equipped to be independent learners. For this action research project, we collected data from 48 students who completed three sets of qualitative questionnaires and participated in two focus groups. Augmented data included excerpts from reflective journals maintained by the flipped classroom teachers. From the data, three dominant themes surfaced. First, the flipped classroom promoted active learning. Second, it supported stronger relationships among students and their teachers. Third, it activated a steep learning curve. Details of 21st century learning are used to conceptualize the findings. One implication of the study is that, at the start of the flipped experience, teachers need to communicate fluidly to students what the flipped classroom is and is not. Keywords: flipped classroom; action research; 21st century 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 | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".