Research Article

Effects of Different Video Modalities on Writing Achievement in Flipped English Classes

Duygu Umutlu 1 * , Yavuz Akpinar 1
More Detail
1 Bogazici University, Turkey* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2), October 2020, ep270, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7993
OPEN ACCESS   3559 Views   1831 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study investigated different modalities of videos in a flipped classroom for English writing classes in an intensive English program at a state university in Turkey. This quasi-experimental study was conducted with six experimental groups (n= 109) and one control group (n = 18). The dataset included the participants’ scores of an essay pretest and two posttests, namely, recall and essay posttests. The data analysis showed that the experimental group viewing the video lecture which includes simultaneous presentation of animation and on-screen text followed by a narration in a user-paced environment outperformed the control group on the recall posttest. The groups studying the video lecture including animation with simultaneous narration and sequential on-screen text in a whole presentation and in a part-by-part presentation outperformed the control group on the essay writing posttest. In the whole presentation, participants studied all the parts of a video in a system-paced design and answered the related questions whereas participants studied each part of a video and answered the related questions in a part-by-part presentation. The paper provides a discussion and a set of recommendations on how to design flipped classrooms.
Keywords: flipped learning, flipped classroom, multimedia learning, video modalities, English as a foreign language, academic essay writing

CITATION (APA)

Umutlu, D., & Akpinar, Y. (2020). Effects of Different Video Modalities on Writing Achievement in Flipped English Classes. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2), ep270. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7993

REFERENCES

  1. Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, 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
  2. Alhamami, M., & Khan, M. R. (2019). Effectiveness of flipped language learning classrooms and students’ perspectives. Journal on English as a Foreign Language (JEFL), 9(1), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v9i1.1046
  3. Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M., (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006
  4. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. USA: International Society for Technology in Education.
  5. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
  6. Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer‐assisted language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 741-753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00970.x
  7. Chen, C. M., & Wu, C. H. (2015). Effects of different video lecture types on sustained attention, emotion, cognitive load, and learning performance. Computers & Education, 80, 108-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.015
  8. Corbalan, G., Kester, L., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2008). Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on learning efficiency and task involvement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 733-756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.02.003
  9. Cook, T., & Wong, V. (2008). Better quasi-experimental practice. In P. Alasuutari, L. Bickman, & J. Brannen (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social research methods (pp. 134-164). London: Sage.
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  11. Day, J. A., & Foley, J. D. (2006). Evaluating a web lecture intervention in a human-computer interaction course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(4), 420-431. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2006.879792
  12. Engin, M. (2014). Extending the flipped classroom model: Developing second language writing skills through student-created digital videos. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(5), 12-26. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotlv14i5.12829
  13. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  14. Foertsch, J., Moses, G., Strikwerda, J., & Litzkow, M. (2002). Reversing the lecture/homework paradigm using eTEACH web‐based streaming video software. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(3), 267-274. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00703.x
  15. Hao, Y. (2016). Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 82-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.03
  16. Jamet, E., & Le Bohec, O. (2007). The effect of redundant text in multimedia instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(4), 588-598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.07.001
  17. Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  18. Kvashnina, O. S., & Martynko, E. A. (2016). Analyzing the potential of flipped classroom in ESL teaching. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 11(03), 71-73. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i03.5309
  19. Lage, M., Platt, G., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment, Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/1183338
  20. Lander, B., & Kuramoto, T. (2013). Development of the autonomous learner through blended learning, Saga University institutional repository, 29, 165-176. Retrieved from http://portal.dl.saga-u.ac.jp/bitstream/123456789/120861/1/bruce_201303.pdf
  21. Love, B., Hodge, A., Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. W. (2014). Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 45(3), 317-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.822582
  22. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning (1st ed.) New York: Cambridge University Press.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164603
  23. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 43-71). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369
  24. Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390-397. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.390
  25. Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-813. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.806
  26. Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2008). Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 380-386. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.380
  27. McGivney-Burelle, J., & Xue, F. (2013) Flipping calculus, PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 23(5), 77-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2012.757571
  28. Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: A strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class. CBE—Life Sciences Education. 9, 473-481. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-04-0063
  29. Nagao, A. (2019). The SFL genre-based approach to writing in EFL contexts. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 4(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-019-0069-3
  30. Neill, S., & Etheridge, R. (2008). Flexible learning spaces: The integration of pedagogy, physical design, and instructional technology. Marketing Education Review, 18(1), 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2008.11489024
  31. Paivio, A. (1978). A dual coding approach to perception and cognition. In H. L. Pick & E. Saltzman (Eds.) Modes of Perceiving and Processing Information (pp. 39-51). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  32. Plass, J. L., & Jones, L. (2005). Multimedia learning in second language acquisition. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 467-488). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819
  33. Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. New York, USA: Oxford University Press
  34. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  35. Sarawagi, N. (2014). A flipped CS0 classroom: Applying Bloom’s taxonomy to algorithmic thinking. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges. 29(6), 21-28. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/2602724.2602731
  36. Schmidt, S. W. (2009). Understanding the online learner. In V. C. X. Wang (Ed.), Handbook of research on e-learning applications for career and technical education: Technologies for vocational training (pp. 482-494). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-739-3
  37. Sezer, B. (2017). The effectiveness of a technology-enhanced flipped science classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(4), 471-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116671325
  38. Shapiro, A. M. (2008). Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 29-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9063-4
  39. Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research. 15(2), 171-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-012-9108-4
  40. Susser, B. (1994). Process approaches in ESL/EFL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(1), 31-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90004-3
  41. Sun, J. C. Y., & Wu, Y. T. (2016). Analysis of Learning Achievement and Teacher-Student Interactions in Flipped and Conventional Classrooms. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(1), 79-99. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i1.2116
  42. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7
  43. Szafir, D., & Mutlu, B. (2013). ARTFuL: Adaptive review technology for flipped learning. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1001-1010). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466128
  44. Talbert, R. (2014). Inverting the linear algebra classroom, PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 24(5), 361-374. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2014.883457
  45. Tomas, L., Evans, N., Doyle, T., & Skamp, K. (2019). Are first year students ready for a flipped classroom? A case for a flipped learning continuum. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0135-4
  46. Turan, Z., & Akdag-Cimen, B. (2019). Flipped classroom in English language teaching: a systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1584117
  47. Umutlu, D. (2016). Effects of different video modalities on writing achievement in flipped English classes (Unpublished master thesis). Bogazici University, Turkey.
  48. Wan, N. (2014). Flipping: The science classroom exploring merits, issues and pedagogy. Teaching Science. 60(3), 16-27. Retrieved from https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=679293416794804;res=IELHSS
  49. White, R. V. (1988). Introduction. In P. C. Robinson (Ed.), Academic writing: Process and product (pp. 4-16). London: Modern English Publications.
  50. White, R., & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. London: Longman.
  51. Wong, K., & Chu, D. W. (2014). Is the flipped classroom model effective in the perspectives of students’ perceptions and benefits? In S. K. S. Cheung, J. Fong, J. Zhang, R. Kwan, & L. F. Kwok (Eds.), Hybrid Learning. Theory and Practice (pp. 93-104). Chennai: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/9783-319-08961-4
  52. Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 67-76. https://doi.org/10.2307/3585940