MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009896802

Flipping your classroom: Is now the time? Lessons learned from a 2nd year research methods course

2025· article· en· W7009896802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlipped classroomKnowledge retentionTest (biology)Active learning (machine learning)Subject (documents)LiteracyBlended learningInformation literacy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A flipped classroom reverses traditional learning spaces such that foundational knowledge is acquired by students independently through recorded lectures and/or readings in advance of the lecture period and knowledge is consolidated through active learning activities in the classroom. A flipped classroom learning environment can promote critical skill development and knowledge application, and therefore, could enhance scientific literacy (SL) skill development, which is critical in the life sciences. SL is an individual’s ability to utilize and apply scientific knowledge in real-world settings. We recently published a study examining the impact of a flipped classroom on SL skill acquisition and retention in a second-year research methods course for kinesiology students. Specifically, we used the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills to assess students’ ability to evaluate the validity of sources, understand elements of research design, create and interpret graphical information, among others.We found that SL skills increased significantly during the flipped classroom semester and were positively correlated with students’ final grade. Interestingly, SL skill retention decreased after the summer break, however, the retention of SL skills was positively correlated to learning approach, with those using a deep approach retaining SL capabilities. In this session, we will share the results of our study and provide tips and tricks for implementing a flipped classroom based on the experiences of the instructor and students. Participants will be provided with some best practices for implementing a flipped classroom approach, regardless of subject matter. This study was approved by the University of Guelph Research Ethics Board (REB#22-07-001). Learning Outcomes: 1. Participants will understand the benefits and limitations of a flipped classroom approach. 2. Participants will leave with some strategies for implementing a flipped classroom that are applicable to any subject/discipline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.475
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.079 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicInnovative Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207