A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FLIPPEDLEARNING AND ELEARNING IN ELT TEACHER EDUCATION

http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55      10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55      Published : Jun 2019
Authored by : Ejaz Mirza , Muhammad Haseeb Nasir

55 Pages : 430-437

    Abstract

    Advancement in technology has brought a positive change in pedagogical practices.

    The development started with the integration of technology as a tool for teaching

    and has reached e-learning and Flipped-learning. In this study, the features of e-learning and Flippedlearning are compared from the perspective of technology and pedagogy in practice. To collect the

    data, English language teachers of public sector colleges and universities, who had attended online

    courses and blended courses, were selected for focus group

    discussion through purely judgmental sampling. The questions for

    focus group discussion were based on the Stephen Bax’s (2003)

    criteria to compare different phases of CALL. The research

    highlights that flipped-learning gives more support and freedom

    to the learner to work at his own pace, whereas e-learning gives

    more opportunities for independent learning. There is no face-toface interaction in e-learning, whereas, in flipped-learning, the

    learners get a chance to interact in real-time. The participants of

    e-learning courses were urged to incorporate some sort of realtime interaction, whether online or face-to-face.

    Key Words

    E-Learning, FlippedLearning, Pedagogical

    Approach, Technology

    Integrated,

    Synchronous,

    Asynchronous

    p-ISSN 2520-0348 | e-ISSN 2616-793X | L-ISSN 2616-793X | DOI: 10.31703/gssr

    Introduction

    Learning outcome is the ultimate focus of any education system. It is meant to manage the curriculum

    in such a way that its learners learn the target content in a capacity to utilize it in their practical life

    meaningfully. To achieve this objective, different pedagogical practices have been introduced and

    applied at different times for multiple types of learners. In the 20th century, after the introduction of

    technology, the traditional classrooms were customized by integrating technology in the physical

    classrooms to maximize learning and to make it empirically more effective. In technology, integrated

    classrooms technology was used as a tool or as an audio-video aid to support and enhance learning.

    According to Bax (2003), “in integrative approaches, students learn to use a variety of technological

    tools as an ongoing process of learning.”

    This customization continued to achieve the core objective of education, and at the verge of the

    20th and 21st century, along with technologically enhanced learning as well as technologically integrated

    learning, e-learning also got popularity amongst education circles. E-learning is learning or accessing

    education through electronic technologies. E-learning was introduced after the invention of the internet,

    as it is a form of distance learning in which communication between the tutor and the learner and

    amongst learners is possible only through the internet. In e-learning, students interact with teachers,

    asking for tutoring services and questions on topics, as well as students also communicate with their

    peers. Students have access to technological media that enable them to participate in several groups of

    knowledge. (Aparicio, 2013). The emergence of e-learning made education more globalized and also

    expanded free access to education.

    However, e-learning is a sort of replication of traditional classrooms in certain aspects. As in ecourses, also, the students are expected to read the material sent by the tutor, carry out the assignments,

    accordingly, participate in the assessment tests on a regular basis and meet the deadlines. E-learning

    requires certain software to be downloaded on the computer of the learner to make him/her access the

    online platform for learning. In e-learning, the learner has more autonomy, and the tutor just organizes

    the learning environment. The learners also have to participate in the discussions and conduct some

    sort of research in e- courses. Subsequently, tutors assess and evaluate their learning.

    Key Words:

    E-Learning, FlippedLearning, Pedagogical

    Approach, Technology

    Integrated,

    Synchronous,

    Asynchronous

    p-ISSN 2520-0348 | e-ISSN 2616-793X | L-ISSN 2616-793X | DOI: 10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55 | URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55

    Abstract

    Ejaz Mirza and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir

    431 Global Social Sciences Review (GSSR)

    There are some problems related to e-learning that have been observed by the e-learners as well as the

    researchers. For example, in the process of e-learning, the communication is asynchronous, and there is

    comparatively less support and facilitation from the tutor. Secondly, there is no real-time interaction between

    learners and tutors in some e-learning practices. The online sessions with the tutor, if there are any, are just in the

    form of video-recorded lectures that do not develop any type of critical thinking or conceptual understanding among

    the learners.

    The experiments with e-learning proved that real-time interaction with the teacher or tutor is also required for

    true learning. As in e-learning through the learners are autonomous, and they can work at their own pace and can

    learn through research; still, they need an environment like a physical classroom in which they can interact with

    the teacher as well as with their peers to develop their critical thinking and share their knowledge. Consequently,

    this realization gave way to blended learning, also known as flipped learning. Flipped learning is a pedagogical

    approach that is a combination of traditional physical classroom and e-learning, but it has shifted the centre of the

    classroom from the teacher to the learner. Flipped Learning Network (2014) defines flipped learning as: “a

    pedagogical approach in which direct instruction moves from the group learning space to the individual learning

    space and the resulting group space is transformed into a dynamic interactive learning environment where the

    educator guides students as they apply concepts and engage creatively in the subject matter.”

    Some people may confuse flipped learning with flipped classroom. Flipped Learning Network (2014) has

    clarified this confusion by defining the four pillars of flipped learning. In the flipped classroom the teachers assign

    their learners some study material or videos etc., to read and watch before coming to the classroom, and when they

    come to the classroom, they are engaged in discussions and other such activities that can develop their critical

    thinking. Assigning supplementary reading or videos can be done through online digital resources or without that.

    Whereas, flipped learning is a type of learning environment in which teacher is flexible about expectations of the

    students’ timeline and assessment of their learning. The mode of instruction is usually shifted to learner-centered

    approach where learners explore the content in more depth and construct their knowledge through participation in

    different creative and critical activities. Teachers who adopt flipped learning, besides developing the concepts of

    their learners, provide their learners opportunities to think critically and creatively, give them feedback and assess

    their work accordingly.

    Flipped learning may be an old pedagogical approach, but a new 21st-century term. Flipped learning in this

    age of technology is also known as blended e-learning. Many studies have been conducted in the past eight years

    on the effectiveness of flipped learning and on the comparison of traditional classrooms and the flipped classrooms.

    Some researchers like Kashada (2014) have worked on the challenges of flipped learning and some have conducted

    the experimental studies to study the efficacy of flipped classrooms for developing learning. However, the

    researchers have hardly found any research in which the flipped learning has been compared with e-learning. The

    reason behind this may be that as the flipped learning phenomenon has emerged with the development of

    technology, the professionals who are practising flipped learning use electronic online resources to manage the

    outside classroom material sharing, therefore, blended e-learning may be confused with flipped-learning.

    Rationale for the Study

    The current study is aimed at finding the features of flipped learning that are shared by e-learning and identifying

    the areas in which the flipped learning may be different from e-learning. The aspect of the study that makes it

    different from the previous studies in the field is that these pedagogical approaches are being explored through the

    feedback of the ELT professionals whose pedagogical skills have been developed through these approaches. Many

    descriptive and experimental studies have been conducted to explore the application and effectiveness of e-learning

    and flipped learning, separately, in different fields of education. Some content analysis studies have also been

    conducted to find out what other researchers have explored about these areas of learning. The current study will

    focus on the application of e-learning and flipped learning in teacher education. The study will highlight the

    similarities and differences in the features of both types of learning environments.

    This study will help the researchers and the ELT professionals to identify features of flipped-learning that make

    it different from e-learning. The study will help the ELT professionals to recognize their role in flipped learning and

    will assist them in designing such activities for their learners that shift the focus of teaching from the teacher to the

    learners, and that could make their learners develop their critical thinking and problem-solving skills in a more

    flexible environment.

    Research Questions

    The current study is conducted to answer the following questions:

    Ejaz Mirza and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir

    432 Global Social Sciences Review (GSSR)

    i. What are the tasks carried out by the ELT professionals in the e-courses; how similar and different they are

    from the courses conducted through flipped learning approach?

    ii. What are the tutors and learners’ activities in flipped learning and e-learning modes of education?

    iii. What is the position of computer and the internet in e-learning and flipped learning modes of education?

    Scope of the Study

    The current study is designed to find out the distinguishing features of e-learning and flipped-learning in ELT

    teacher education. There are many platforms that provide ELT teachers opportunities to develop their professional

    skills. Some of the platforms are purely e-learning platforms that manage distance teacher education courses

    through online classrooms and some of them promote blended and flipped-learning, in which some of the tasks

    are managed from distance through online resources and some of the sessions are conducted in real time, face to

    face. However, the study will take into account only selective massive online courses like Teaching Grammar to

    young learners, courses offered by US state department through E-teacher Scholarship program and international

    resource person courses organized by HEC, Pakistan like Research Methods and Transforming English Language

    Skills (TELS). The data for the study will be gathered from the ELT professionals who have attended these courses.

    Literature Review

    Technology has affected our life in multiple ways. Living in the digital world and being the digital natives, we have

    normalized and naturalized technology in almost all domains of our lives. Teaching and learning is also one of the

    important domains of our lives that have been affected by technology. E-learning and flipped-learning are the latest

    trends in the teaching and learning contexts, and are also known as pedagogical approaches being applied for

    effective learning.

    Many researchers have studied e-learning and flipped-learning in different teaching learning contexts. Elearning refers to any electronically assisted instruction and is often associated with instruction offered via computer

    and the internet. (Li, 2014) In e-learning, learning is facilitated by transmission of knowledge and through managing

    autonomous learning by the learner. Flipped instruction on the other hand requires self-directed learning outside

    the classroom through discovery and experimentation, not necessarily under the supervision of an instructor

    (Karaaslan, 2017). According to Balaji (2018), in a flipped-learning environment learners “study at their home using

    the modern technology, such as listening to screencasts of the teacher, and they will do practical assignments, such

    as debates, discussions and problem-solving, in the classroom.”

    To be successful in flipped-learning, people need to have the ability to manage their own learning and to

    develop critical thinking that will ensure that they are confident at communicating with the web in order to engage,

    participate, and get involved with learning activities. Learners also need to have ability and competence of using

    different tools in order to engage in meaningful interaction. There are critical abilities, such as collaboration,

    creativity, and a flexible mindset, that are “pre-requisites for active learning in a changing and complex learning

    environment without the provision of too much organized guidance by facilitators” (Kop, 2011)

    Flipped-classroom is mostly used in science subjects and there is lot of research on the use of flipped-learning

    in science subjects, but it has been rarely applied or experimented in a language classroom. Balaji (2018) has

    experimented this approach for teaching language in ELT classroom. He hypothesized his study as, “by flipping the

    classroom in ELT context, a teacher can successfully ingrain difficult concepts such as active voice or indirect speech

    into slow bloomers.”

    Different researches have been consulted to get information about e-learning and flipped-learning. Most of

    them focus on e-learning and flipped--learning separately. Some of them have based their research on comparative

    study of flipped-learning and the traditional classroom. The current study is focused on comparing e-learning with

    flipped-learning in ELT teacher education to see how effective both the strategies are in teacher education and how

    similar and how different are the experiences of the ELT professionals who have experienced them.

    Research Methodology

    This research is descriptive in nature and follows qualitative approach to highlight the features of flipped-learning

    and e-learning. Focused group interviews technique was applied to gather data from ten ELT professionals to

    explore the similarities and differences in the features of flipped-learning and e-learning. As the current study is

    aimed at exploring flipped-learning and e-learning in ELT teacher education therefore, the population for the

    research is ELT professionals who have attended ELT training courses managed through electronic environment

    and flipped-learning.

    Ten ELT professionals have been selected as a sample to participate in focused group interviews and to select

    A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education

    Vol. IV, No. II (Spring 2019) 433

    the requisite sample non-probability, purposive sampling technique was used as the researchers have used their

    own judgment to select those ELT professionals to gather data who have attended certain ELT training courses

    through e-learning as well as flipped learning. Three of the participants participated only in e-learning, three of

    them participated online in flipped-learning and four of them had the experience of both. The instrument or tool to

    gather data was focused group interviews along with observations by the researchers. The researchers have designed

    certain questions to guide the focus group discussion (as attached in Appendix) and took help from colleagues to

    manage the interviews using said questions. The researchers recorded the responses of the participants of the

    focused group interviews for analysis to draw conclusions of the study.

    To design the guiding questions for the focused group interviews, the researcher adapted the Stephen Bax’s

    (2003) criteria to compare different phases of CALL. To compare the three phases of CALL, restricted CALL, open

    CALL and integrated CALL, Stephen Bax suggested certain parameters on which these phases can be called and it

    can be observed how one phase is similar to or different from the other. Those parameters include:

    • Type of task: What type of tasks or activities are done to cover the lesson.

    • Type of student activity: What the students are supposed to do in those activities.

    • Type of feedback: What type of feedback is given, correct/incorrect or some remarks, comments etc.

    • Teacher roles: What role is performed by the teacher, monitor, guide, facilitator etc.

    • Teacher’s attitude: Is the teacher a conventional symbol of fear or he/she is friendly?

    • Position in curriculum: Is computer integrated or only computer is used, or computer is used before content

    etc.

    • Position in lesson: Whole CALL lesson, or lesson in parts

    • Physical position of computer: Personal computer is used, or computer lab is used or only teacher uses the

    computer etc.

    All of these criteria were not used. They were used only as a guideline to form the questions.

    Data Analysis

    Data gathered through interviews is presented in the form of a table in which responses of the participants have
    been recorded in the form of a table in which responses related to e-learning and flipped-learning for each question
    have been recorded in parallel to find out similarities and differences in their features. Then their responses have
    been discussed to reach to the conclusion.
    In the following table, data gathered as responses to different questions related to the features of e-learning
    and flipped-learning is presented.
    S. No Guiding Questions Responses
    E-Learning Flipped-learning
    1 What was the duration of
    your course?
    i. 8 weeks (MOOCs)
    ii. 10 weeks (E-teacher
    scholarship program)
    i. 8 months (Research Methods)
    ii. 1 year (TELS)
    2 What type of tasks did
    you do in the course?
    i. Reading articles
    ii. Participating in the
    discussion (in form of
    writing our response to a
    question or other
    participants, views
    iii. Taking tests and doing
    assignments
    i. Reading articles online to explore
    the concepts
    ii. Research to practice the concepts
    learnt online
    iii. Discussion in face-to-face sessions
    about what we learnt and the action
    research which we conducted in our
    own time
    3 Were you involved in
    group work or individual
    work?
    i. Usually individual work.
    ii. Only once got a chance to
    work in pair with another
    learner who was physically
    away.
    i. Worked on our own, individually,
    when away the class working in our
    own pace.
    ii. Group discussion to evaluate one
    another’s work
    4 Did you get a chance to
    interact with your tutor
    and your peers?
    i. Never had face to face
    interaction
    ii. Interaction through email or
    discussion board.
    i. Online support from the tutors was
    always available.
    ii. Had 4-5 face to face sessions of one
    week each with the tutor and other
    peers
    Ejaz Mirza and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir
    434 Global Social Sciences Review (GSSR)
    5 Were you engaged in
    some sort of research as
    a course completion
    requirement?
    i. The final assessment was a
    research project.
    ii. One research project related
    to the topic
    i. To complete the course, we had to
    complete an action research project
    (Research methods)
    ii. Develop materials for language
    teaching, selecting reading texts and
    designing activities (TELS)
    6 What was the method of
    assessment and
    evaluation of your
    performance?
    i. Quiz
    ii. Assignments
    iii. Mid-term test
    iv. Participation in discussion
    board
    v. Project work
    i. No formal assessment
    ii. Evaluation of our research projects
    and guidelines about that
    iii. Evaluation of lesson plans and
    materials and oral feedback to
    improve
    7 What method was
    applied to provide you
    the feedback on your
    performance?
    i. Score and grades i. Oral and written feedback on how to
    improve our work
    8 What was the tutor’s
    activity in the course?
    ii. Uploading reading material
    iii. Giving and evaluating
    assignment
    iv. Assessing quizzes and
    midterm
    v. Giving deadlines for
    completion of task
    vi. Announcing the course
    completion
    i. Directing towards the readings
    resources from where we could get
    help
    ii. Evaluating our work
    iii. Managing discussions and
    monitoring discussions
    iv. Giving feedback and support
    9 How was computer and
    internet applied to the
    course?
    i. Every activity was managed
    through internet. If internet
    access was not available
    course could not be
    completed
    i. Internet was used to consult online
    resources and readings and interact
    and send our work to the tutors
    when he was away
    ii. Computer was used to compile our
    work
    10 What type of
    development will you
    suggest to develop the
    course further for future
    participants?
    ii. Many a times, there was a
    confusion or difficulty that
    the tutor was required to
    discuss and address but it
    could not be done.
    iii. Some type of face to face or
    online live interaction must
    be there between the tutor
    and the course participants.
    i. Some of the participants of the
    course felt that there would have
    been some more face to face
    sessions.
    ii. The course provided us the ample
    space to develop learning at our own
    pace
    Some observations made during the focus group discussion have helped the researchers to compare e-learning with
    flipped-learning. It was observed that the courses that were purely online were shorter as compared to flipped
    courses, as the duration of e-courses was 8-10 weeks, whereas flipped courses were usually eight months to one
    year long. In the e-courses the participants or the learners never got a chance of face-to-face interaction whereas
    in flipped-learning the face-to-face sessions were quite regular. The communication in e-learning was asynchronous,
    whereas in flipped-learning it was synchronous and including real time interaction. In e-courses the learners mostly
    worked individually, only once or twice they got a chance to work with other learners whereas flipped-learning is
    more collaborative as the learners worked on the materials by their own, but during the face-to-face sessions they
    had discussions in groups for more in-depth learning.
    It was also observed that in flipped-learning the learners got plenty of time to conduct research, and their tasks
    were more creative and research oriented. Their work was evaluated for their further development and the feedback
    was not in the form of scores rather it was comments and points for further development, whereas in e-courses the
    learners tasks were more traditional like assignment, quizzes, reading and limited time for research, their work was
    assessed by the instructor and the feedback was in the form of scores that was quite intimidating, and what they
    did once was assessed and could not be improved.
    In e-courses, as the whole learning is managed through internet, so the teachers’ role is to assign reading,
    giving and assessing assignments and quizzes, uploading reading materials and students’ score etc. On the other
    hand, in flipped-learning along with internet and computer, face-to-face discussions were also managed by the
    A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education
    Vol. IV, No. II (Spring 2019) 435
    teacher to develop critical thinking and analytical skills of the learners. The teacher’s role was more like a guide
    and facilitator and mediator, as the teacher directed the learners towards readings and study materials, whereas
    the learners themselves search for the relevant material and used to read it to understand the concept, they used
    internet and computer to search for the relevant information and to compile their work. The teacher in the flippedlearning environment just directed the learners towards the study material, managed the discussions, mediated them
    and evaluated the learners’ work and suggested improvement. Rest of the leaning was learners’ responsibility that
    made them more autonomous.
    The learners of the flipped-learning environment were quite satisfied with their learning, however, the
    participants of the e-courses wanted to have some more real time interaction with the instructor and the other
    students, whether it be through online platforms or it may be face-to-face.

    Conclusion

    It is however, concluded that both e-learning and flipped-learning are effective techniques in teacher education as

    both of them promote learner autonomy. However, flipped-learning promotes critical thinking and facilitation and

    support from the tutor as compared to e-learning. In flipped-learning, learning environment is more flexible;

    however, it is more systematic in e-learning. In flipped-learning the tutor performs the role of a manager, an

    evaluator, monitor and a facilitator as well as a guide. Whereas, in e-learning, the tutor is the manager and the

    evaluator. In e-learning the whole learning occurs through computer and internet, whereas, flipped-learning is a

    blend of interaction through computer as well as real life interaction for application of knowledge. If we evaluate

    them on blooms taxonomy, flipped-learning reaches to the level of application also. However, as suggested by the

    participants, if some sort of live interaction is also blended into the e-learning, it will be equally effective.

References

  • Aparicio, M. (2013). E-learning concept trends. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, (pp. 81-86). New York.
  • Balaji, A. (2018). Flipping the Classroom in ELT Context. International Journal of Science Research and Review, 7(1), 75-77.
  • Bax, S. (2003). CALL- past, present and future. iateflcompsig (pp. 13-28). Elsevier Science Ltd.

Cite this article

    CHICAGO : Mirza, Ejaz, and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir. 2019. "A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education." Global Social Sciences Review, IV (II): 430-437 doi: 10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55
    HARVARD : MIRZA, E. & NASIR, M. H. 2019. A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education. Global Social Sciences Review, IV, 430-437.
    MHRA : Mirza, Ejaz, and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir. 2019. "A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education." Global Social Sciences Review, IV: 430-437
    MLA : Mirza, Ejaz, and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir. "A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education." Global Social Sciences Review, IV.II (2019): 430-437 Print.
    OXFORD : Mirza, Ejaz and Nasir, Muhammad Haseeb (2019), "A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education", Global Social Sciences Review, IV (II), 430-437
    TURABIAN : Mirza, Ejaz, and Muhammad Haseeb Nasir. "A Comparative Study of Flipped-Learning and E-Learning in ELT Teacher Education." Global Social Sciences Review IV, no. II (2019): 430-437. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).55