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

Duygu Umutlu; Yavuz Akpinar

doi:10.30935/cedtech/7993

Duygu Umutlu ¹ ^* , Yavuz Akpinar ¹

More Detail

CONT ED TECHNOLOGY, Volume 12, Issue 2, Article No: ep270

https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7993

OPEN ACCESS 3080 Views 1586 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

References

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
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
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
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. USA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
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
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
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
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.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
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
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
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
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
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
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
Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
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
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
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
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
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning (1^st ed.) New York: Cambridge University Press.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164603
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. New York, USA: Oxford University Press
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Umutlu, D. (2016). Effects of different video modalities on writing achievement in flipped English classes (Unpublished master thesis). Bogazici University, Turkey.
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
White, R. V. (1988). Introduction. In P. C. Robinson (Ed.), Academic writing: Process and product (pp. 4-16). London: Modern English Publications.
White, R., & Arndt, V. (1991). Process writing. London: Longman.
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
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

Citation

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

Umutlu, D., and 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

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

Umutlu, Duygu, and Yavuz Akpinar. "Effects of Different Video Modalities on Writing Achievement in Flipped English Classes". Contemporary Educational Technology 2020 12 no. 2 (2020): ep270. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7993

Umutlu, Duygu et al. "Effects of Different Video Modalities on Writing Achievement in Flipped English Classes". Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 12, no. 2, 2020, ep270. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7993

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