The European Educational Researcher

The role of feedback type and peer interaction on knowledge acquisition in a flipped classroom on social science research methods

The European Educational Researcher, Volume 7, Issue 2, June 2024, pp. 21-40
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 256 DOWNLOADS: 351 Publication date: 15 Jun 2024
ABSTRACT
The flipped classroom approach has increasingly been implemented in higher education and has shown promise for enhancing learning processes across many domains. Within this instructional method, learners use certain learning materials to prepare for in-class lessons focusing on deeper understanding and application of knowledge. Both feedback as well as peer interaction are known to be able to facilitate such higher-order processing. However, questions remain on to what extent they can enhance the effectiveness of flipped classrooms in higher education. To examine these questions, we employed a 2x2 quasi-experimental design in a flipped classroom course on empirical research methods in the social sciences (N = 105). We investigated the effects of type of feedback (knowledge of correct response vs. elaborated) during a quiz on declarative knowledge and peer interaction during an application-oriented exercise (individual learning vs. cooperative learning). Elaborated feedback exerted a significant, medium-sized effect on declarative and application-oriented knowledge. A mediation analysis showed that about half of the effect of type of feedback on application-oriented knowledge was mediated by declarative knowledge. Results implicate elaborated feedback as an effective tool to foster declarative knowledge acquisition in flipped classrooms. Subsequently, this process also positively influenced the formation of application-oriented knowledge during the in-class learning phases.
KEYWORDS
flipped classroom, feedback, peer interaction, application-oriented knowledge, higher education
CITATION (APA)
Schlag, R., Stegmann, K., & Sailer, M. (2024). The role of feedback type and peer interaction on knowledge acquisition in a flipped classroom on social science research methods. The European Educational Researcher, 7(2), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.722
REFERENCES
  1. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 863–875, https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180
  2. Akçayir, G., & Akçayir, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
  3. Anselmi, P., Colledani, D., & Robusto, E. (2019). A comparison of classical and modern measures of internal consistency. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article number: 2714. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02714
  4. Attali, Y., & van der Kleij, F. (2017). Effects of feedback elaboration and feedback timing during computer-based practice in mathematics problem solving. Computers & Education, 110, 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.012
  5. Bai, S., Hew, K. F., & Huang, B. (2020). Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review, 30, Article number: 100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322
  6. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
  7. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Longman.
  8. Bredow, C. A., Roehling, P. V., Knorp, A. J., & Sweet, A. M. (2021). To flip or not to flip? A meta-analysis of the efficacy of flipped learning in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 91(6), 878–918. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019122
  9. Buhl-Wiggers, J., la Cour, L., Franck, M. S., & Kjærgaard, A. (2023). Investigating effects of teachers in flipped classroom: A randomized controlled trial study of classroom level heterogeneity. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article number: 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00396-4
  10. Chen D, & Fritz M. S. (2021). Comparing alternative corrections for bias in the bias-corrected bootstrap test of mediation. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 44(4), 416–427. https://doi.org.10.1177/01632787211024356
  11. Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 205–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6
  12. Cole, A. W., Lennon, L., & Weber, N. L. (2019). Student perceptions of online active learning practices and online learning climate predict online course engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(5), 866–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619593
  13. Cooper, J. L., & Robinson, P. (2000). The argument for making large classes seem small. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 81, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.8101
  14. Cronbach L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02310555
  15. DeLozier, S. J., & Rhodes, M. G. (2017). Flipped classrooms: A review of key ideas and recommendations for practice. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9356-9
  16. Erbil, D. G. (2020). A review of flipped classroom and cooperative learning method within the context of Vygotsky theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article number: 1157. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01157
  17. Gabelica, C., De Maeyer, S., & Schippers, M. C. (2022). Taking a free ride: How team learning affects social loafing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(4), 716–733. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000713
  18. Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), Article number: 3. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3
  19. Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students’ self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, Article number: 100955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955
  20. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  21. Jacobs, G., & Seow, P. (2015). Cooperative learning principles enhance online interaction. Journal of International and Comparative Education, 4(1), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.14425/00.76.07
  22. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38, 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
  23. Kang, E.-Y., & Han, Z. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12189
  24. Kaufmann, R., & Vallade, J. I. (2020). Exploring connections in the online learning environment: Student perceptions of rapport, climate, and loneliness. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(10), 1794–1808. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1749670
  25. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.008
  26. Koopman, J., Howe, M., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Sin, H.-P. (2015). Small sample mediation testing: Misplaced confidence in bootstrapped confidence intervals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036635
  27. Kozanitis, A., & Nenciovici, L. (2022). Effect of active learning versus traditional lecturing on the learning achievement of college students in humanities and social sciences: A meta-analysis. Higher Education, 86, 1377–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00977-8
  28. Krause, U.M., Stark, R. & Mandl, H. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.003
  29. Lai, H.‑M., Hsieh, P.‑J., Uden, L., & Yang, C.‑H. (2021). A multilevel investigation of factors influencing university students’ behavioral engagement in flipped classrooms. Computers & Education, 175, Article number: 104318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2021.104318
  30. Lin, G.-Y., Wang, Y.-S., & Lee, N. L. (2022). Investigating factors affecting learning satisfaction and perceived learning in flipped classrooms: the mediating effect of interaction. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 5759–5780. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2018616
  31. Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2019). The impact of flipped classrooms on student achievement in engineering education: A meta‑analysis of 10 years of research. Journal of Engineering Education, 108(4), 523–546. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20293
  32. Loh, R. C.-Y., & Ang, C.-S. (2020). Unravelling cooperative learning in higher education: A review of research. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 5(2), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.02.2
  33. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542
  34. Michaelsen, L. K., & Sweet, M. (2011). Team-based learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 128, 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.467
  35. Munir, M. T., Baroutian, S., Young, B. R., & Carter, S. (2018). Flipped classroom with cooperative learning as a cornerstone. Education for Chemical Engineers, 23, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2018.05.001
  36. Nihalani, P. K., Mayrath, M., & Robinson, D. H. (2011). When feedback harms and collaboration helps in computer simulation environments: An expertise reversal effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 776–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025276
  37. Oortwijn, M., Boekaerts, M., Vedder, P., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2008). Helping behaviour during cooperative learning and learning gains: The role of the teacher and of pupils' prior knowledge and ethnic background. Learning and Instruction, 18(2), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.014
  38. Owens, D. C., Sadler, T. D., Barlow, A. T., & Smith-Walters, C. (2017). Student motivation from and resistance to active learning rooted in essential science practices. Research in Science Education, 50, 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9688-1
  39. Pi, Z., & Hong, J. (2016). Learning process and learning outcomes of video podcasts including the instructor and PPT slides: A Chinese case. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1060133
  40. Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037559
  41. Sailer, M., & Sailer, M. (2021). Gamification of in-class activities in flipped classroom lectures. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12948
  42. Schoemann, A. M., Boulton, A. J., & Short, S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617715068
  43. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and non-experimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422
  44. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073137
  45. Simonsmeier, B. A., Flaig, M., Deiglmayr, A., Schalk, L., & Schneider, M. (2021). Domain-specific prior knowledge and learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist, 57(1), 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1939700
  46. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
  47. Slavin, R. E. (2016). Instruction based on cooperative learning. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (2nd ed., pp. 388–404). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315736419
  48. Sønderlund, A. L., Hughes, E., & Smith, J. (2018). The efficacy of learning analytics interventions in higher education: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2594–2618. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12720
  49. Strelan, P., Osborn, A., & Palmer, E. (2020). The flipped classroom: A meta-analysis of effects on student performance across disciplines and education levels. Educational Research Review, 30, Article number : 100314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100314i
  50. Subhash, S., & Cudney, E. A. (2018). Gamified learning in higher education: A systematic review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 109–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.028
  51. Swart, E. K., Nielen, T. M. J., & Sikkema-De Jong, M.T. (2019). Supporting learning from text: A meta-analysis on the timing and content of effective feedback. Educational Research Review, 28, Article number: 100296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100296
  52. Taber, K. S. (2017). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  53. Tang, T., Abuhmaid, A. M., Olaimat, M., Oudat, D. M., Aldhaeebi, M., & Bamanger, E. (2020). Efficiency of flipped classroom with online-based teaching under COVID-19. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 1077–1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1817761
  54. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
  55. Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best “blend” of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003
  56. Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2020). Feedback: An important key in the online environment of a flipped classroom setting. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 924–937, https://doi.org./10.1080/10494820.2020.1815218
  57. van der Kleij, F., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 263–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020
  58. Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2017). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with computer-supported collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 477–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7
  59. Wang, S.-L., & Wu, P.-Y. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: The social cognitive perspective. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1589–1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.03.004
  60. Wiederhold, B. K. (2020). Connecting through technology during the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: Avoiding “Zoom Fatigue”. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(7), 437–438. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.29188.bkw
  61. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
  62. Zambrano, J. R., Kirschner, F., Sweller, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Effects of prior knowledge on collaborative and individual learning. Learning and Instruction, 63, Article number: 101214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.011
LICENSE
Creative Commons License