Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?

Year 2018, Issue: 13, 133 - 144, 25.01.2018

Zeynep Turan Yüksel Göktaş

Abstract

The purpose of
this study is to determine the impact of the flipped classroom method on
student motivation and what related factors increase and decrease motivation. The
study followed the mixed research method and the sample of the study consisted
of 116 first grade early childhood education undergraduate students at a
university in Turkey. This study was conducted
in an introductory computer course. The flipped classroom method is compared to traditional techniques in this
study. Data were collected through
semi-structured interviews and a course interest survey in this 10-week mixed
method study. Inferential and descriptive analysis methods were applied to the data. An independent
samples t-test was used to determine the difference between experimental and
control groups in terms of motivation.
The interviews were analyzed with
descriptive analysis method. Results showed that students who were trained with the flipped classroom method
had more motivation than students who were
trained with traditional methods.
Students reported that hands-on in-class activities, group work, and
gamification activities increased their motivation. Additionally, students reported that the difficulty level of in-class activities, watching videos, and dealing with
the course outside of the classroom decreased their motivation. Consequently,
when designed effectively, the flipped
classroom method can increase the students’ motivation towards the course. Also, suggestions for practitioners were discussed in this study.

Keywords

flipped classroom teacher education blended learning flipped learning

References

  • Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2014). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1–14.
  • Acar, S. (2009). The effects of ARCS motivation strategies on learners academic successes, permanences of learning, motivationas and attitudes in web supported performance based learning. (Unpublished PhD dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Akarawang, C., Kidrakran, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2015). Enhancing ICT competency for teachers in the Thailand basic education system. International Education Studies, 8(6), 1-8.
  • Cavanaugh, C. (2003). Information age teacher education: Educational collaboration to prepare teachers for today’s students. TechTrends, 47(2), 24-27.
  • Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, & Chen, N.S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16–27.
  • Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580.
  • Ertmer, P. A., Evenbeck, E., Cennamo, K. S., & Lehman, J. D. (1994). Enhancing self- efficacy for computer technologies through the use of positive classroom experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 45–62.
  • Fraga, L. M. & Harmon, J. (2014). The flipped classroom model of learning in higher education: An investigation of preservice teachers’ perspectives and achievement. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(1), 18-27.
  • Keller, J. M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 2(24), 26-34.
  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383-433). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Keller, J. M., & Subhiyah, R. (1987). Manual for Course interest survey (CIS). Tallahassee, FL: Instructional Systems Program, Florida State University, USA.
  • Kim Kyu, M. , Kim Mi, S., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university : An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50.
  • Koh, J. H. L. (2011). Computer skills instruction for pre-service teachers: A comparison of three instructional approaches. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2392–2400.
  • Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160–173.
  • Krueger K., Hansen L., Smaldino S. (2000). Preservice teacher technology competencies. TechTrends, 44(3), 47–50.
  • McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry. (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Means, T. B., Jonassen, D. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (1997). Enhancing relevance: Embedded ARCS strategies vs. purpose. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 5-17.
  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  • Missildine, K., Fountain, R., Summers, L., & Gosselin, K. (2013). Flipping classroom to improve student performance and satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(10), 597–599.
  • Musib, M. K. (2014). Student perceptions of the impact of using the flipped classroom approach for an introductory-level multidisciplinary module. CDTL Brief, 17(2), 15-20.
  • Newby, T. J., Stepich, D. A., Lehman, J. D., & Russell, J. D. (2006). Instructional technology for teaching and learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Proske, A., Roscoe, R. D., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Game-based practice versus traditional practice in computer-based writing strategy training: Effects on motivation and achievement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 481-505.
  • Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84.
  • Sykes, G., Bird, T., & Kennedy, M. (2010). Teacher education: Its problems and some prospects. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 464-476.
  • Staker, H., & Horn, M. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Retrieved from the Innosight Institute website: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535180.pdf.
  • Street, S.E., Gilliland, K.O., McNeil, C., & Royal, K. (2015). The flipped classroom improved medical student performance and satisfaction in a pre-clinical physiology course. Medical Science Educator, 25, 35–43.
  • Tucker, B. (2012), the Flipped Classroom. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/the- flipped-classroom/.

Year 2018, Issue: 13, 133 - 144, 25.01.2018

Zeynep Turan Yüksel Göktaş

Abstract

References

  • Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2014). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1–14.
  • Acar, S. (2009). The effects of ARCS motivation strategies on learners academic successes, permanences of learning, motivationas and attitudes in web supported performance based learning. (Unpublished PhD dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Akarawang, C., Kidrakran, P., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2015). Enhancing ICT competency for teachers in the Thailand basic education system. International Education Studies, 8(6), 1-8.
  • Cavanaugh, C. (2003). Information age teacher education: Educational collaboration to prepare teachers for today’s students. TechTrends, 47(2), 24-27.
  • Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, & Chen, N.S. (2014). Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Computers & Education, 79, 16–27.
  • Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580.
  • Ertmer, P. A., Evenbeck, E., Cennamo, K. S., & Lehman, J. D. (1994). Enhancing self- efficacy for computer technologies through the use of positive classroom experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 45–62.
  • Fraga, L. M. & Harmon, J. (2014). The flipped classroom model of learning in higher education: An investigation of preservice teachers’ perspectives and achievement. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 31(1), 18-27.
  • Keller, J. M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 2(24), 26-34.
  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383-433). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Keller, J. M., & Subhiyah, R. (1987). Manual for Course interest survey (CIS). Tallahassee, FL: Instructional Systems Program, Florida State University, USA.
  • Kim Kyu, M. , Kim Mi, S., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university : An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50.
  • Koh, J. H. L. (2011). Computer skills instruction for pre-service teachers: A comparison of three instructional approaches. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2392–2400.
  • Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160–173.
  • Krueger K., Hansen L., Smaldino S. (2000). Preservice teacher technology competencies. TechTrends, 44(3), 47–50.
  • McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry. (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Means, T. B., Jonassen, D. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (1997). Enhancing relevance: Embedded ARCS strategies vs. purpose. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 5-17.
  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  • Missildine, K., Fountain, R., Summers, L., & Gosselin, K. (2013). Flipping classroom to improve student performance and satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education, 52(10), 597–599.
  • Musib, M. K. (2014). Student perceptions of the impact of using the flipped classroom approach for an introductory-level multidisciplinary module. CDTL Brief, 17(2), 15-20.
  • Newby, T. J., Stepich, D. A., Lehman, J. D., & Russell, J. D. (2006). Instructional technology for teaching and learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Proske, A., Roscoe, R. D., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Game-based practice versus traditional practice in computer-based writing strategy training: Effects on motivation and achievement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 481-505.
  • Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84.
  • Sykes, G., Bird, T., & Kennedy, M. (2010). Teacher education: Its problems and some prospects. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 464-476.
  • Staker, H., & Horn, M. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Retrieved from the Innosight Institute website: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535180.pdf.
  • Street, S.E., Gilliland, K.O., McNeil, C., & Royal, K. (2015). The flipped classroom improved medical student performance and satisfaction in a pre-clinical physiology course. Medical Science Educator, 25, 35–43.
  • Tucker, B. (2012), the Flipped Classroom. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/the- flipped-classroom/.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Zeynep Turan

Yüksel Göktaş

Publication Date January 25, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Issue: 13

Cite

APA Turan, Z., & Göktaş, Y. (2018). Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?. Journal of Education and Future(13), 133-144.
AMA Turan Z, Göktaş Y. Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?. JEF. January 2018;(13):133-144.
Chicago Turan, Zeynep, and Yüksel Göktaş. “Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?”. Journal of Education and Future, no. 13 (January 2018): 133-44.
EndNote Turan Z, Göktaş Y (January 1, 2018) Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?. Journal of Education and Future 13 133–144.
IEEE Z. Turan and Y. Göktaş, “Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?”, JEF, no. 13, pp. 133–144, January 2018.
ISNAD Turan, Zeynep - Göktaş, Yüksel. “Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?”. Journal of Education and Future 13 (January 2018), 133-144.
JAMA Turan Z, Göktaş Y. Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?. JEF. 2018;:133–144.
MLA Turan, Zeynep and Yüksel Göktaş. “Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?”. Journal of Education and Future, no. 13, 2018, pp. 133-44.
Vancouver Turan Z, Göktaş Y. Innovative Redesign of Teacher Education ICT Courses: How Flipped Classrooms Impact Motivation?. JEF. 2018(13):133-44.
 Download Cover Image
Gereken durumlarda baş editör ile iletişim kurmak için jef.editor@gmail.com adresine e-posta gönderebilirsiniz.