http://dx.doi.org/10.15334/FLE.2019.26.4.23

Kyong-Hyon Pyo

Contribution of Learning Readiness to Group Discussion in University English Flipped Classroom

Kyong-Hyon Pyo*

* Dept. of English, Professor, khpyo@dankook.ac.kr

Dankook University

Pyo, Kyong-Hyon. (2019). Contribution of learning readiness to group discussion in university English flipped classroom. Foreign Languages Education, 26(4), 23-44.

The study is aimed at investigating whether learning readiness contributes to university students’ group discussion in English in a flipped classroom. The research questions are: 1) Is there a change in learning readiness before and after flipped learning?; 2) Is there a change in students’ participation in group discussion before and after flipped learning?; and 3) Does learning readiness contribute to participation in group discussion? A total of 52 students participated in the study. Student survey questionnaires and quizzes were collected for data analysis. Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test, a non-parametric test for repeated measures t-test, and multiple regression analysis were utilized to answer the research questions. The statistical analyses produced the following results: 1) there was a significant change in students’ participation in learning readiness and group discussion; and 2) learning readiness and quizzes greatly contributed to group discussion. These findings corroborated the previous research that learning readiness is essential for self-directed learning in a successful flipped classroom. This suggests that teachers devise ways to help students engage in online activities for greater learning readiness.

[flipped classroom/learning readiness/quiz/group discussion,

거꾸로 교실/학습 준비도/퀴즈/그룹 토론]

I. Introduction

Contribution of Learning Readiness to Group Discussion in University...

Flipped learning is enjoying its soaring popularity at school since teachers in the field of English language teaching (ELT) have realized that it enhances learners’ participation in class compared to the conventional counterpart. The flipped classroom has become possible by reversing the traditional class elements; switching the teacher-led lecture that used to take place inside the classroom with individual learning activities/tasks usually done outside the classroom after class is finished. The learner-centered flipped classroom introduced by Jonathan Bergmann and Aron Sams became a buzzword that all teachers emulate to adopt in their teaching practice thanks to the widespread use of information and communication technology (ICT).

Established as a well-received instructional model by mixing strengths of online and offline classes, the flipped classroom brings pedagogical benefits to learners. Since Jonathan Bergmann and Aron Sams proposed its original model in the science subject, a series of studies have been conducted to support its positive impact on class one after another. All these resulted in a downpour of research studies over a short period of time with which even meta-analysis research is introduced. As an amazing number of research studies have been done in this area, so research topics greatly vary from seeking appropriate instructional models in subject areas, exploring class strategies to identifying the effectiveness of flipped learning in enhancing academic achievement and affective factors (Bang & Lee, 2014; Eom & Lee, 2017; Jeong, 2014; Jin & Shin, 2016; Kang & Ahn, 2015; Kim, 2015, 2017, 2018; Kim, Chun, & Choi, 2014; Kim & Kim, 2014; Kim & Pyo, 2017; Kim & Shin, 2016; Lee, 2013; Lee & Pyo, 2018; Lee, Kim, & Kim, 2014; Lim, 2015; Pyo, 2017, 2018; Song, 2017; Song & Suh, 2016; Yim & Rha, 2017).

In comparison with a large number of research studies that have substantiated its effectiveness both in academic achievement and affective domains in ELT (Kim, 2015, 2017, 2018; Kim & Pyo, 2017; Lee, H., 2015; Lee & Pyo, 2018; Seo & Seong, 2015; Yim & Han, 2016; Yim & Rha, 2017), there has been a dearth of research on factors leading to a successful operation of the flipped classroom (Bae, 2017; Lee, H.-S., 2015; Park, 2018; Pyo, 2017). Exploring effective ways to implement flipped learning in higher education, Park (2018) found that flipped learning is a more effective teaching model for students who have higher self-directed learning readiness. Park (2018)’s study is significant that, whereas flipped learning has been reported in the previous studies to help students generally enhance their self-directed learning attitude, its effectiveness in terms of educational outcomes depends on learners’ self-directed learning readiness. In her effort to find out what components of the flipped classroom were conducive to greater learning outcomes, Pyo (2017) revealed a finding that online learning readiness significantly mattered in offline class activities and learners’ general satisfaction on the class. Bae (2017) also checked the impact of pre-class learning readiness on midterm and final exams at university. He implemented quiz as a way to tap into the extent to which students studied the online lecture and later found that the first quiz only had a significant impact on the midterm exam.

At the same time, there have been studies of teachers’ and learners’ perceptions toward flipped learning as an attempt to explore barriers to implementing the instructional method (Hwang, 2016; Kim, 2017; Lee & Min, 2016; Park, 2018; Park & Cha, 2015). Hwang (2016) and Park (2018) found that, although students believed in the importance of student-centered learning and hence the educational benefits of flipped learning, they felt a big burden for online study before class. Teachers also witnessed the same problem as a major difficulty to carrying out flipped learning in reality (Hwang, 2016; Park, 2018). Kim (2017) and Lee and Min (2016) also pointed out in their teachers’ perception studies on flipped learning that even teachers, who were seeking to implement flipped learning in their class with an understanding of its instructional benefits to students, shared some reservations for the before-class online portion. They were afraid that well-intentioned new instructional model might not go as planned because students feel burdened with the online class before the offline one.

It appears that if students’ self-directed learning attitude is not well-supported, flipped learning-based class procedures cannot be carried out as planned. Students’ preparation of the offline class through successful participation in the online class is required to bring optimal pedagogical benefits of flipped learning to learners. Then, it is imperative to have an empirical study to look into the impact of pre-class learning readiness on their offline class participation. This question will answer teachers’ old concern whether students’ class learning readiness is essential to have a successful flipped classroom.

In this study, students’ class learning readiness was measured by two instruments: five quizzes administered at the beginning of offline classes throughout the semester and a learner questionnaire for their perception toward online class readiness collected two times at the beginning and end of the semester. At the same time, their participation in group discussion during the offline classes was quantified by a learner questionnaire two times at the beginning and end of the semester. The research questions to answer in this study are as follows:

1. Is there a significant change in students’ learning readiness online before and after flipped learning?

2. Is there a significant change in students’ participation in group discussion offline before and after flipped learning?

3. Does students’ learning readiness online contribute to their participation in group discussion offline?

II. Theoretical Background

Flipped learning was started in 2007 by two chemistry teachers, John Bergmann and Aaron Sams, who began experimenting with recording content lectures for underachieving students and those who missed class. The idea was to have students watch the videos at home and work on exercises and projects in the classroom under supervision, “flipping” the homework to school and the lecture to home. At first the science teachers focused on video creation, making one for every lesson. However, they soon discovered the activities were the key to the flipped classroom, not the videos themselves. They believed the guiding question for the flipped classroom movement is “What is best for the students in my classroom?” (Bergmann & Sams, 2012).

In the traditional model of classroom instruction, the teacher is typically the central focus of a lesson and the primary disseminator of information during the class period. The teacher responds to questions while students defer directly to the teacher for guidance and feedback. In a classroom with a traditional style of instruction, individual lessons may be focused on an explanation of content through a lecture. Student engagement in the traditional model may be limited to activities in which students work independently or in small groups on a task designed by the teacher. Class discussions are typically centered on the teacher, who controls the flow of the conversation.

In a flipped classroom, on the contrary, the teacher helps students study the learning material online by having them access to it at home; then, in the offline class, students carry out varied learner-centered activities such as discussion, group projects, and so on. The flipped classroom intentionally shifts instruction to a learner-centered model in which time in the classroom is used to explore topics in greater depth and create meaningful learning opportunities while students are initially introduced to new topics outside of the classroom. As Bishop and Verleger (2013) also pointed out, the focus of class activities is not to simply deliver contents through video lectures, but to help students engage in activities for self-directed learning. They went on to maintain that learner styles, peer learning, cooperative learning, and problem-solving be considered when building class activities in the flipped classroom.

Many variations of the flipped classroom exist depending on what online and offline activities are and how long they last under different lesson objectives. However, there are core characteristics of the flipped classroom agreed upon as follows (Bergmann & Sams, 2013; Davies, Dean, & Ball, 2013). Firstly, students turn into main active learning agents with greater authority. Secondly, teachers are not dominant supervisors or knowledge deliverers, but learning facilitators. Thirdly, online resources play a role of a learning aid to help students to understand lesson contents; further, they help them to develop higher-order thinking skills and language abilities. An easy and free access to internet made teachers and learners as the beneficiaries of the new instructional model since they were able to use online resources beyond the space and time constraint (Davies et al., 2013; Lee, 2013). The initial teaching tenet was able to be truly realized by the reversed class instruction: the flipped classroom became a supportive environment for application of learned concepts and skills, and for deeper discussion of learned content.

Tauted as an innovative instructional model with great pedagogical advantages to learners, flipped learning has been adopted and applied by many teachers and scholars in all subjects and all levels of schools (Eom & Lee, 2017; Jeong, 2014; Jin & Shin, 2016; Kim, 2015, 2017, 2018; Kim et al., 2014; Kim & Pyo, 2017; Kim & Shin, 2016; Lee, 2013; Lee & Lee, 2016; Lee & Pyo, 2018; Lim, 2015; Pyo, 2017, 2018; Seo & Sung, 2015; Song & Suh, 2016; Yim & Han, 2016; Yim & Rha, 2017). Academics’ attention to flipped learning has exploded over the last five years, which can be inferred from the number of the published papers in relation to this topic. It seems that most of the studies made a conclusion in consensus, pointing to positive impacts of flipped learning in both affective domains and academic achievement.

However, there have been research findings, mostly from teachers’ and students’ perception studies on flipped learning, that teachers also need to take into consideration barriers to implementing the flipped classroom as part of realistic concerns (Hwang, 2016; Kim, 2017; Lee & Min, 2016; Park, 2018). Hwang (2016) and Park (2018) found that, although students believed in the importance of student-centered learning and hence the educational benefits of flipped learning, they felt a big burden for online study before class. Teachers also witnessed the same problem as a major difficulty in carrying out flipped learning in practice (Hwang, 2016; Park, 2018). Kim (2017) and Lee and Min (2016) in their teachers’ perception studies on flipped learning also pointed out that teachers, who were seeking to implement flipped learning in their class, voiced concerns toward the difficulty of making online and offline materials. They were afraid that a well-intentioned new instructional model might not go as planned because students feel burdened with the online study, considering it extra work to do. It was further feared that the flipped classroom would fail without students’ proper preparation of offline classes. Development of self-directed learners promoted by the flipped classroom proponents and educators is not quite possible in real educational settings without learner readiness online.

In response to the specific question on the role of pre-class learning readiness, Bae (2017) checked its impact on midterm and final exams at university. He implemented quiz as a way to tap into the extent to which students studied the online lecture and found that only the first quiz had a significant impact on the midterm exam. Pyo (2017), with a greater interest in learner readiness for offline class, revealed that online learning readiness significantly contributed to greater participation in offline class activities, and offline class to a greater sense of satisfaction over their study. The study, however, had its limitation that students’ learning readiness was indirectly measured by their own perceptions through questionnaire. Therefore, it is meaningful and intriguing to do an empirical study on  contribution of learning readiness to class participation by employing quiz to directly measure students’ understanding of the online material.

III. Research Method

1. Participants

Fifty-two students participated in the study; those participants were from two sections (22 and 30 students each) of an English major elective course under the title of Current English Practice in 2018, fall semester. Initially, 53 students registered for the course participated, but one of them did was not included for statistical analysis because s/he did not complete the student questionnaire. An instructor was in charge of both sections of the course for the current study. There were 37 female students and 15 male students; 46 English major students and six non-English major students (one Chinese, two Spanish, one German, one Mongolian and one Marine Corps). As an elective course, there is no restriction on school year, but the majority of students were sophomores and juniors. Students signed for this course with full recognition that they would engage in group discussion activities in English only. During Week 3, the instructor arranged groups, taking into consideration students’ gender and school year in order to operate the offline discussion class effectively. Then, a group leader was appointed by student’s vote.

2. Flipped Classroom Procedure

The class procedure in the study is presented in TABLE 1. The flipped classroom has 2 phases with a different process (pre-class -> during-class) from a conventional one (during-class -> post-class). The class for this study met twice a week on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Each week a learning material with a topical article and discussion questions was studied online and offline. The platform used for online communication and study was the school’s learning management system (LMS).

For Phase I, before class, teacher uploaded a learning material online one week prior to the offline class. The learning material consisted of one or two selected articles and pre- and post-reading questions for group discussion. A few visual materials mostly taken from You Tube or TED were hypertexted so that they can facilitate students’ understanding of articles and issues of the week. Students were required to print out the material and bring it to the class. Further, quiz was constantly announced to bring students’ attention to it so that they were ready for it. As the last activity for Phase I, students did their individual homework, reading aloud the whole article while recording, and uploaded their work at the school LMS. The teacher marked their performance along with feedback. For the first 2-3 weeks when the online assignment started the teacher provided technical support for those in difficulty of using school’s LMS.

TABLE 1

Flipped Learning Class Procedure

Phase	Classroom	Teacher	Student
I (Pre-class)	Outside	Create learning material Upload it at school’s LMS	Study learning material (selected articles, discussion questions & visual materials) Study for a quiz in the next class Upload recording homework
II (During- class)	Inside (Tuesdays & Thursdays) + Outside	- Provide a quiz Help students do group discussion activities Check students’ outcomes in groups Assign students online individual homework Check students’ online individual homework and provide feedback	Take a quiz Do group activities (article reading & discussions) Upload a recording of reading articles aloud

For Phase II, during class, students took a quiz prepared for checking if they studied the learning material at the beginning of the class about 15 minutes. Then, students started group activities using the reading material. First, students responded to 3-5 discussion questions, which is a pre-reading discussion activity and serves a role of warm-up before reading news articles. Through those questions, students were able to brainstorm and develop schema related to the new topic before they read articles. This also helped students engaged in expressing their ideas/opinions in English.

Next, students read news articles in groups. Although there was no rigid way of doing the group reading activity, students were encouraged to get a gist while going over each paragraph. They were also encouraged to ask for clarification what they did not understanding in structure and meaning. In spite of students’ access to the online material and quiz, their understanding and preparedness varied; some students just checked some of the vocabulary words for meaning, but others prepared their responses to all the discussion questions in their printouts for active participation in class.

On Thursdays, the post-reading activity continued where students did group discussion by responding to discussion questions in the reading material. Those questions were made to specifically check and deepen students’ understanding of the core issues in the articles. For a wrap-up activity, there was a class-level discussion session. Each group spent some time preparing group responses to each discussion question for sharing at the whole class. Groups were able to share responses and expanded their thoughts and opinions at the class-level discussion session. It was done about 20 minutes under the instructor’s guidance before the end of the class. Outside the classroom, students did their assignments for each topic, which was to upload their recordings of reading articles aloud.

3. Data Collection

This paper intended to see if students’ class learning readiness makes a significant contribution to their participation in group discussion during the offline flipped classroom. A survey questionnaire was newly developed to solicit students’ perception toward their class learning readiness and group discussion participation. The student questionnaire was largely composed of two sections: 1) four items asking students’ class learning readiness and 2) seven items asking their participation in group discussion during the offline class. All 11 items used five-point Likert scale with choices of ‘absolutely agree,’ ‘agree,’ ‘somewhat agree,’ ‘disagree,’ and ‘absolutely disagree.’

It was assured that student responses were absolutely confidential, their personal identification is unknown, and their responses would not be used for purposes other than research. The questionnaire written in English was administered two times, each before and after the flipped classroom of a semester, which fell on weeks 4 and 14. 52 out of 53 students completed the questionnaire both times; one student who was absent on week 14 was excluded from this study.

In line with the students’ perceived class learning readiness and group discussion participation obtained by the survey questionnaire, quiz scores were also collected as a source of empirical data on students’ class learning readiness. It would be also interesting to see the relationship between students’ perceived learning readiness and their quiz data and check how they’d match each other. During the research period, a total of four quizzes were administered on weeks 4, 6, 10, and 13 on different learning materials of varied topics. Quizzes were announced to students in advance so that they were able to study if they wanted to. Students took quizzes at the beginning of the class about 15 minutes. The proportion of quiz in grading for the course was 20% with each quiz accounting for 5%. Given that 20% in total is not a negligent portion for the final grade, students were all fully aware that their great class learning readiness revealed by a good performance in quiz is critical in this course, specially continuing with the offline class activities.

A quiz is made up of two categories of questions (See Appendix for a full version of quiz). The first category is self-rating questions with three items to check students’ preparedness before class. Next, to verify the extent of students’ self-rated preparedness, the second category of questions are added; five items for new vocabulary words, two items for paragraph translation, and one item for response to a discussion question. It can be said that the second category of questions in a quiz are truly tapping into students’ learning readiness since they all deal with the learning material. In other words, it is believed that students with a high score in quiz are have a high level of class learning preparedness.

4. Data Analysis

Before inferential statistical analyses were conducted to answer the research questions, an analysis of internal consistency was done to check whether students’ responses obtained from survey questionnaire are reliable. Variables, number of items, and internal reliability estimates (Cronbach’s α) are summarized in the table below. Students’ class learning readiness and participation in group discussion both seem to be at an acceptable level of internal consistency at 0.70 or higher while post-PGD showed the highest level with an internal consistency of 0.90.

TABLE 2

Variables with Internal Reliability Estimates

Variable	# of Items	Cronbach’s α
		Pre	Post
Class Learning Readiness (CLR)	4	0.78	0.76
Participation in Group Discussion (PGD)	7	0.87	0.90
Total	11	0.83	0.83

Basic descriptive statistics of independent and dependent variables used for statistical analyses are summarized in TABLE 3. Items grouped under each variable were averaged and their descriptive statistics were obtained.

TABLE 3

Descriptive Statistics of Variables

	N	Min	Max	M	Std	Skewness	Kurtosis
Quiz	52	20.25	39.00	33.26	.60	-.77	.25
Pre-CLR	52	1.50	4.50	3.16	.09	-.40	.60
Post-CLR	52	1.50	5.00	3.72	.10	-.61	1.56
Pre-PGD	52	2.00	4.71	3.32	.09	-.12	.74
Post-PCD	52	2.86	5.00	3.93	.09	-.07	.33

Note. Pre-CLR: Pre-Class Learning Readiness, Post-CLR: Post-Class Learning Readiness, Pre-PGD: Pre-Participation in Group Discussion, Post-PGD: Post-Participation in Group Discussion.

Initially, paired samples t-test was planned to see if there is a significant change in class learning readiness and participation in group discussion before and after the intervention, or the flipped classroom. Before conducting statistical analyses to test research hypotheses, however, Shapiro-Wilk test for a normality assumption was checked, which is a pre-condition for using parametric statistics. It turned out that all five variables in TABLE 3 did not pass the normality test at the 0.05 significance level. This means that Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test, a non-parametric test for paired samples t-test, is the right choice for accurate inferential statistics.

Next, multiple regression analysis was employed to test which variables are a significant predictor of students’ participation in group discussion. The independent variables included for the analysis were quiz, pre- and post-class learning readiness. SPSS 25 was utilized to implement statistical analyses.

IV. Results and Discussion

1. Change in Class Learning Readiness

Mean difference in class learning readiness before and after the flipped classroom was tested by using Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test. The test result is summarized in TABLE 4.

TABLE 4

Result of Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test in Class Learning Readiness Before and After the Flipped Classroom

		N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks	z
Post-CLR ― Pre-CLR	Negative Ranks	5	14.20	71.00	4.70*
	Positive Ranks	36	21.94	790.00
	Ties	11
	Total	52

* p < .0005

In TABLE 4, the result of a signed test show that students’ class learning readiness significantly increased over time before and after the flipped classroom, z = 4.70, p < .0005. In other words, the extent to which students prepare for the offline group discussion activity at the end of the semester significantly increased compared to the beginning of the semester in the flipped classroom.

Some of the questionnaire items to check students’ class learning readiness were ‘It is not necessary to search for more resources to get ready for the class activity (reverse coding)’, ‘I’m willing to prepare the learning material for my active participation in group discussion’, and ‘I try to make my own responses to the discussion questions in the learning material before going to class.’ The positive change may indicate that students who wanted to participated in flipped learning activities were willing to invest more time and effort in studying their learning material beforehand which, directly leads to more active class participation and greater learning performance in the offline class activities and tasks.

2. Change in Group Discussion Participation

Mean difference in group discussion participation before and after the flipped classroom was tested by using Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test. The test result including descriptive and inferential statistics is presented in TABLE 5.

TABLE 5

Result of Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test in Group Discussion Participation Before and After the Flipped Classroom

		N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks	z
Post-PGD ― Pre-PGD	Negative Ranks	8	9.44	75.50	5.43*
	Positive Ranks	42	28.56	1199.50
	Ties	2
	Total	52

* p < .0005

A signed test indicated that the increase in group discussion participation is statistically meaningful before and after the flipped classroom, z = 5.43, p < .0005. Simply put, students’ participation in group discussion offline significantly increased after the flipped classroom.

Participation in group discussion was checked by some of the items in the questionnaire as follows: ‘I want to communicate more with my group member in order to improve my English speaking skills’, ‘I’m willing to ask questions of my group members for clarification when their responses are not clear’, ‘I’m willing to encourage my group members to more actively participate in group discussion’, ‘I don’t like sharing with my group members my opinions/responses to the discussion questions (reverse coding), and ‘I try to clearly deliver my opinions/responses to the discussion questions.’ The quantitative finding shows that students in the flipped classroom were able to develop their discussion skills in English through group interaction.

3. Contribution of Class Learning Readiness to Group Discussion Participation

Multiple regression analysis was conducted to test whether class learning readiness is a significant predictor of participation in group discussion offline. For this study, class learning readiness was measured by three variables: quiz, pre-class learning readiness, and post-class learning readiness. Estimated statistics for the multiple regression model are summarized in TABLE 6.

TABLE 6

Model Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis
for Group Discussion Participation

Mo -del	R	R2	Adjust -ed R2	Std.Error of Estimate	Statistics of Change					Durbin- Watson
					R2 change	F change	DF 1	DF 2	Sig.
1	0.67	0.44	0.41	0.48	0.44	12.71	3	48	0.00	1.87

Note. Predictors: (constant), Quiz, Pre-CLR, Post-CLR

The results revealed that all three class learning readiness variables accounted for 44% of the variance in group discussion participation (R2 = .44, F[3,48] = 12.71, p < .001). Durbin-Watson analysis showed that the errors of the predictor variables are independent from each other.

The impact of the predictor variables on group discussion participation was tested and the results are presented in TABLE 7. Post-class learning readiness (β = 0.53, t = 4.21, p < .005) made the greatest contribution, followed by quiz (β = 0.33, t = 3.01, p < .05). However, the contribution of pre-class learning readiness was not significant (β = -.06, p = .65). From these results, we recognize that some of the class learning readiness variables are accountable for students’ participation in offline class activities.

TABLE 7

Coefficients of Multiple Regression Analysis for Group Discussion

Variable	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients (β)	t	Multicollnearity
	B	Std. Error			Tolerance	VIF
Quiz	.05	.02	.33	3.01*	.95	1.06
Pre-CLR	-.06	.12	-.06	-.46	.78	1.29
Post-CLR	.47	.11	.53	4.21**	.74	1.35

* p < .005  ** p < .0005

V. Conclusion

There has recently been an abundance of research studies where researchers and scholars attest to the pedagogical values of the flipped classroom with strong conviction that its model helps to develop self-directed learners and leads them to achieve greater academic performance. At the same time, however, some learners and teachers share their voices against flipped learning for practical reasons that it can be burdensome to teachers unless they are ready with ICT contents and that it would not pay off unless students have a certain level of class learning readiness.

Against this backdrop, it is high time to investigate whether students’ class learning readiness is a prerequisite to a successful flipped classroom. Then, the current study tried to answer the following questions: Does students’ class learning readiness in a flipped classroom contribute to their group discussion? If so, what is the contribution? In order to tap into students’ class learning readiness, two sets of data sources were gathered: quiz for checking the extent of understanding the online learning material and students’ perceived learning readiness collected through the questionnaire at the beginning and end of flipped learning at a university English class.

From this study, it was found that both students’ perceived learning readiness and group discussion participation significantly improved over time after flipped learning was introduced. Next, students’ preparedness made a significant contribution to group discussion in the flipped classroom, accounting for 44% of the variance of the dependent variable. Two of the independent variables (post-class learning readiness) and quiz turned out to be significant predictors. This finding seems reasonable in that students’ pre-class preparedness greatly improved at the end of the semester. This positive change led to a stronger relationship between post-class learning readiness and group discussion participation.

The results of the study are in line with those found in Hoover et al. (2018)’s and Ihm et al. (2017)’s study, confirming that learning readiness had a significant influence on learning outcomes. Similar to the current research design, Hoover et al. (2018) utilized quiz to assess students’ preparation prior to class and a survey following the classroom activities, and revealed positive correlations between quiz scores and students’ understanding and increased confidence. However, Ihm et al. (2017) administered self-assessment and survey to check students’ preparedness and found that the flipped classroom positively impacted their learning readiness and engaged more students in the discussion.

The results of the current study formulate two pedagogical implications for a university English flipped classroom in relation to class learning readiness. Based on the finding that greater pre-class preparedness greatly contributed to participation in offline class activities, first, teachers need to establish formative assessment to identify students’ understanding of the pre-class material; furthermore, they have to carefully consider how formative assessment can be implemented in order to play a role of a facilitator or motivator to students. For example, teachers need to make decisions as follows: whether feedback on formative assessment will be made each session, how many sessions of formative assessment will be optimal, whether scores of formative assessment will be used as part of the final grade, and more.

In addition to the necessity of implementing formative assessment, there is an issue related to the content and format of the formative assessment. As its term, formative assessment, clearly implies, it should be closely aligned with class activities/tasks offline. It is indispensible for teachers to establish lesson objectives in each period, plan activities/tasks students, and accordingly generate formative assessment. Only this way would teachers help learners with their learning process in this new instructional model, which, in turn, would contribute to greater learning outcomes through active class participation.

The current study is not without its limitations. First of all, as the study did not include a control group, it is not possible to assert that students’ group discussion participation is sheerly due to the class learning readiness. Then, a future study project that compares students’ participation between a control and an experimental group in a flipped classroom will make clearer the answers to the fundamental question of learning readiness as a contributor to a successful flipped classroom. Next, the current finding that pre-class learning readiness led to greater group discussion participation does not mean that it contributed to greater achievement in learning outcomes. Studies to see effects of flipped learning on achievement are found only in the field of nursing and medicine (Hoover et al., 2018; Ihm et al., 2017). Some may say that it is meaningful and encouraging to know that flipped learning helps to grow self-directed learners who participate in class activities with greater motivation; however, we, teachers should take more steps to find positive links between flipped learning and achievement in language learning.

References

Bae, D.-Y. (2017). The effect of confirming and evaluating prestudy readiness on academic achievement in flipped learning. Korean Chinese Inquiry of Humanities, 55, 59-81. doi:10.26528/kochih.2017.55.059

Bang, J.-H., & Lee, J. H. (2014). Exploring educational significance of flipped classroom and its implications for instructional design. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 31(4), 229-319.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Washington DC: International Society for Technology in Education.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2013). Flip your students’ learning. Educational Leadership, 70(6), 16-20.

Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual conference & Exposition, Atlanta, USA. Retrieved from https: peer.asee.org/22585

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 & Development, 61, 563-580.

Eom, W.-Y., & Lee, M.-H. (2017). The effects of flipped learning using educational SNS: Focusing on mathematics in elementary school. Journal of Educational Information and Media, 23(1), 109-138. doi:10.15833/KEIM.23.1.109

Hoover, C. A., Dinndorf-Hogenson, G. A., Peterson, J. L., Tollefson, B. R., Berndt, J. L., & Laudenbach, N. (2018). Flipped classroom: Do students perceive readiness for advanced discussion? Journal of Nursing Education, 57(9), 163-165.

Hwang, H. (2016). An investigation of teachers’ and students’ awareness on the flipped learning in mathematics. Unpublished master’s thesis, Jeju University, Jeju.

Ihm, J., Choi, H., & Roh, S. (2017). Flipped-learning course design and evaluation through student self-assessment in a predental science class. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 29(2), 93-100. doi:10.3946/kjme.2017.56

Jeong, H.-J. (2014). The flipped learning. Seoul: KAOCE.

Jin, M.-H., & Shin, Y.-J. (2016). The effects of science-based STEAM program using flipped learning on students’ learner participation. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 27(3), 77-98. doi:10.20972/kjee.27.3.2016.09.77

Kang, N.-H., & Ahn, M.-R. (2015). Flipping a Korean university EFL classroom with teacher-crafted youtube videos. STEM Journal, 16(3), 109-134.

Kim, B.-H., & Kim, B. H. (2014). Korean language culture and discussion class – role-exchange discussion class based on flipped learning. Urimal, 37, 141-166.

Kim, H.-Z. (2018). The effect of French flipped learning strategy on motivation and academic achievement. Foreign Languages Education, 25(3), 161-182. doi:10.15334/FLE.2018.25.3.161

Kim, M.-J. (2017). Analysis of needs for teacher training for flipped learning instruction: Focused on specialized high school. Unpublished master’s thesis, Pusan University, Pusan.

Kim, M., & Shin, C. (2016). The effects of flipped classroom on middle school learners’ English academic achievement and affective domains. Secondary Institute of Education, 64(2), 289-314.

Kim, Y.-S. (2015). The effect of the flipped class on the affective experience, learning achievement, and class satisfaction of college English language learners. Foreign Languages Education, 22(1), 227-254. doi:10.15334/ FLE.2015.22.1.227

Kim, Y., & Pyo, K.-H. (2017). A study on self-directed learning attitude and academic achievement in a flipped classroom. Studies in Linguistics, 45, 423-455.

Kim, N., Chun, B.-A., & Choi, J.-I. (2014). A case study of flipped learning at college: Focused on effects of motivation and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Technology, 30(3), 467-492.

Lee, D.-Y. (2013). Research on developing instructional design models for flipped learning. The Journal of Digital Policy & Management, 11(2), 83-92. doi:10.14400/JDPM.2013.11.12.93

Lee, H. (2015). The effects of English teaching-learning on learners’ English improvement and affective factors through flipped learning in a university ESP class. Journal of Linguistic Studies, 20(3), 73-99. doi: 10.21291/jkals.2015.20.3.4

Lee, H.-S. (2015). Analysis of the structural relationship among factors related to the effects of flipped learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kongju National University, Chungnam.

Lee, B.-H., & Lee, H.-C. (2016). The effects of science lesson with the application of flipped learning on science academic achievement and scientific attitude. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 35(1), 78-88. doi:10.15267/keses.2016.35.1.078

Lee, H.-O., & Min, C.-K. (2016). A study of secondary English teachers’ perceptions of the flipped classroom. Secondary English Education, 9(3), 99-122.

Lee, S., & Pyo, K.-H. (2018). Changes in university students’ self-directed learning attitude in English flipped classroom. Foreign languages Education, 25(3), 127-159. doi:10.15334/fle.2018.25.3.127

Lee, J., Kim, Y., & Kim, Y. (2014). A study on application of learner-centered flipped learning model. The Korean Society for Educational Technology, 30(2), 163-191.

Lim, J. W. (2015). A study of flipped instructional model and application for pre-service teachers of English. English Language & Literature Teaching, 21(2), 157-173.

Park, E.-H. (2018). Effectiveness in educational outcomes of flipped learning in higher education. Korean Journal of Adult & Continuing Education Studies, 9(1), 49-66. doi:10.20512/kjace.2018.9.1.49

Park, T. J., & Cha, H. J. (2015). Investigation of teachers’ awareness of flipped classroom to explore its educational feasibility. The Journal of Korean Computer Education, 18(1), 81-97.

Pyo, K.-H. (2017). Variables affecting learner achievement and satisfaction in a flipped classroom. Studies in Linguistics, 36, 357-385. doi:10.17002/sil..43.201704.345

Pyo, K.-H. (2018). Effects of flipped classroom on university students’ academic self-efficacy. Studies in Linguistics, 49, 553-581.

Seo, Y. E., & Seong, G. (2015). Effects of flipped learning models on EFL learners’ English achievement and attitudes. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 15(4), 765-792. doi:10.15738/kjell.15.4. 2015.12.765

Song, J. (2017). The influence of flipped learning on high school mathematics learning: Self-directed learning, learning attitude, and change in scholastic achievement. Unpublished master’s thesis, Yonsei University, Seoul.

Song, H.-S., & Suh, S.-Y. (2016). Effects of project-based flipped classroom on the affective attitude and metacognitive learning strategies of pre-service teachers of English. English Language & Literature Teaching, 22(2), 167-192.

Yim, E.-H., & Han, J.-I. (2016). A study on exploring the applicability of flipped classroom approach to teaching and learning of English vocabulary. Foreign Languages Education, 23(4), 113-138. doi:10.15334/FLE2016.23.4.113

Yim, G., & Rha, K.-H. (2017). Effects of using flipped learning in the college setting on students’ English achievement and class satisfaction. Studies in Linguistics, 44, 289-307.

APPENDIX

QUIZ

5 - Absolutely agree  4 - Agree  3 - Somewhat agree

2 - Disagree  1 - Absolutely disagree.

1. I’ve read the whole article.	__________

2. I’ve looked up new words in the dictionary for better understanding.	__________

3. I’ve read the discussion questions and thought about my responses.	__________

*** Write down your answers in repose to the following questions.***

4. (meaning) evasive	________________

5. (meaning) vulnerable	________________

6. (meaning) attribute to	________________

7. (meaning) emulate	________________

8. (meaning) rebuke	________________

9. (translation) Government officials seem to be trying to deflect pubic attention from the latest suicide statistics and downplay their socio-economic implications. They attribute the upward trend in the suicide rate partly to what is known as the Werther effect of emulating the suicide of a celebrity.

10. (translation) It is necessary to strengthen the social safety net for people in need, particularly the growing aged population living under the poverty line. But a decrease in tax revenue amid prolonged economic downturn will limit the funding for expanded welfare programs.

11. (Discussion Question) According to the article, what is the dark outlook on the suicide rate in Korea?

예시언어(Examples in): English

적용가능 언어(Applicable Languages): English

적용가능 수준(Applicable Levels): Tertiary

Kyong-Hyon Pyo, Professor

Department of English

Dankook University

(31116) 119 Dandae-ro, Anseo-dong, Cheonan-si, Chungnam

E-mail: khpyo@dankook.ac.kr

Received on September 30, 2019

Reviewed on October 28, 2019

Revised version received on November 3, 2019