| Literature DB >> 31906054 |
Francisco Javier Hinojo Lucena1, Jesús López Belmonte1, Arturo Fuentes Cabrera1, Juan Manuel Trujillo Torres1, Santiago Pozo Sánchez1.
Abstract
The technological characteristics of today's society have favored the inclusion of information and communication technology (ICT) and the emergence of new training methodologies in educational spaces. This study addresses flipped learning as an innovative approach in the teaching and learning processes of physical education at two educational stages, primary and secondary education. The objective of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of flipped learning with respect to traditional methodology. A descriptive and correlational experimental research design was used through a quantitative perspective. Two study groups were established, one control (traditional methodology) and one experimental (flipped learning) in each educational stage. A total of 119 students from an educational center in Ceuta (Spain) participated. These participants were chosen intentionally. The data were collected through a questionnaire. The results show that the experimental group obtained better evaluations in the academic indicators, highlighting the motivation, autonomy, and interactions between the different agents. Regarding the effectiveness of flipped learning according to the educational stage, its potential was demonstrated in both stages, highlighting a significant improvement in autonomy in secondary education.Entities:
Keywords: didactic benefits; digital learning; educational innovation; experimentation; learning impact; primary and secondary education
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31906054 PMCID: PMC6981672 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17010276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Study groups by sex and educational stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Experimental group | 16 (59.26) | 11 (40.74) |
| Control group | 12 (48) | 13 (52) |
| Subtotal | 28 (53.85) | 24 (46.15) |
|
|
|
|
| Experimental group | 14 (43.75) | 18 (56.25) |
| Control group | 18 (51.43) | 17 (48.57) |
| Subtotal | 32 (47.76) | 35 (52.24) |
Source: own elaboration.
Reliability and validity indices for the attitudinal factor.
| Variables | α | CR | AVE | MSV | Motiva | Auton | Critical | Resolution | Class Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Motivation | 0.901 | 0.814 | 0.611 | 0.580 | 0.880 | ||||
| Autonomy | 0.905 | 0.908 | 0.601 | 0.470 | 0.511 * | 0.719 | |||
| Critical | 0.873 | 0.815 | 0.582 | 0.134 | 0.341 * | 0.251 * | 0.792 | ||
| Resolution | 0.890 | 0.901 | 0.712 | 0.529 | 0.747 * | 0.610 * | 0.264 * | 0.791 | |
| Class time | 0.901 | 0.921 | 0.604 | 0.417 | 0.611 * | 0.582 * | 0.271 * | 0.703 * | 0.713 |
* Significant correlation p < 0.001. Source: own elaboration. CR: Composite Reliability, AVE: Average Variance Extracted, MSV: Maximum shared squared variance.
Reliability and validity indices for the interactive factor.
| Factor | α | CR | AVE | MSV | Teacher | Classmates | Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teacher | 0.903 | 0.815 | 0.613 | 0.215 | 0.899 | ||
| Classmates | 0.901 | 0.812 | 0.807 | 0.631 | 0.384 * | 0.898 | |
| Content | 0.899 | 0.843 | 0.625 | 0.510 | 0.311 | 0.804 * | 0.766 |
* Significant correlation p < 0.001. Source: own elaboration.
Results obtained for study variables in control group.
| Variables | Likert Scale, | Parameters | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Few | Enough | Completely | M | SD | Skew | Kurt | ||
|
| Motivation | 10 (33.3) | 12 (40) | 6 (20) | 2 (6.7) | 2 | 0.89 | 1.19 | −0.5 |
| Autonomy | 12 (40) | 11 (36.7) | 5 (16.7) | 2 (6.7) | 1.9 | 0.91 | 0.99 | −0.34 | |
| Critical | 7 (23.3) | 13 (43.3) | 7 (23.3) | 3 (10) | 2.2 | 0.91 | 1.32 | −0.61 | |
| Resolution | 6 (20) | 10 (33.3) | 10 (33.3) | 4 (13.3) | 2.4 | 0.95 | 1.40 | −0.94 | |
| Class time | 5 (16.7) | 9 (30) | 13 (43.3) | 3 (10) | 2.47 | 0.88 | 1.66 | −0.76 | |
| Teacher | 15 (50) | 10 (33.3) | 3 (10) | 2 (6.7) | 1.73 | 0.89 | 0.82 | 0.42 | |
| Classmates | 10 (33.3) | 16 (53.3) | 4 (13.3) | 0 (0) | 1.8 | 0.65 | 1.22 | −0.73 | |
| Content | 6 (20) | 13 (43.3) | 9 (30) | 2 (6.7) | 2.23 | 0.84 | 1.46 | −0.6 | |
| Ratings * | 4 (13.3) | 14 (46.7) | 10 (33.3) | 2 (6.7) | 2.33 | 0.79 | 1.69 | −0.4 | |
|
| Motivation | 11 (36.7) | 14 (46.7) | 3 (10) | 2 (6.7) | 1.87 | 0.85 | 1.02 | 0.42 |
| Autonomy | 7 (23.3) | 14 (46.7) | 6 (20) | 3 (10) | 2.17 | 0.9 | 1.3 | −0.44 | |
| Critical | 7 (23.3) | 12 (40) | 9 (30) | 2 (6.7) | 2.2 | 0.87 | 1.38 | −0.74 | |
| Resolution | 5 (16.7) | 9 (30) | 11 (36.7) | 5 (16.7) | 2.53 | 0.96 | 1.6 | −0.93 | |
| Class time | 5 (16.7) | 13 (43.3) | 9 (30) | 3 (10) | 2.33 | 0.87 | 1.53 | −0.61 | |
| Teacher | 17 (56.7) | 10 (33.3) | 2 (6.7) | 1 (3.3) | 1.57 | 0.76 | 0.74 | 1.54 | |
| Classmates | 11 (36.7) | 13 (43.3) | 6 (20) | 0 (0) | 1.83 | 0.73 | 1.13 | −1.11 | |
| Content | 7 (23.3) | 15 (50) | 6 (20) | 2 (6.7) | 2.1 | 0.83 | 1.32 | −0.18 | |
| Ratings * | 3 (10) | 13 (43.4) | 12 (40) | 2 (6.7) | 2.43 | 0.76 | 1.88 | −0.37 | |
* Sample grouping of ratings (min: 0; max: 10) was carried out based on the following criteria: none: 0–4.9; few: 5–5.9; enough: 6–8.9; completely: 9–10. Source: own elaboration.
Results obtained for study variables in experimental group.
| Variables | Likert Scale, | Parameters | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Few | Enough | Completely | M | SD | Skew | Kurt | ||
|
| Motivation | 5 (16.7) | 6 (20) | 11 (36.7) | 8 (26.7) | 2.73 | 1.03 | 1.68 | −1.01 |
| Autonomy | 3 (10) | 12 (40) | 10 (33.3) | 5 (16.7) | 2.57 | 0.88 | 1.78 | −0.76 | |
| Critical | 5 (16.7) | 11 (36.7) | 11 (36.7) | 3 (10) | 2.4 | 0.88 | 1.59 | −0.74 | |
| Resolution | 4 (13.3) | 6 (20) | 15 (50) | 5 (16.7) | 2.7 | 0.9 | 1.89 | −0.5 | |
| Class time | 4 (13.3) | 8 (26.7) | 12 (40) | 6 (20) | 2.67 | 0.94 | 1.77 | −0.83 | |
| Teacher | 3 (10) | 4 (13.3) | 14 (46.7) | 9 (30) | 2.97 | 0.91 | 2.16 | 0.18 | |
| Classmates | 2 (6.7) | 5 (16.7) | 13 (43.3) | 10 (33.3) | 3.03 | 0.87 | 2.32 | −0.23 | |
| Content | 4 (13.3) | 9 (30) | 15 (50) | 2 (6.7) | 2.5 | 0.81 | 1.86 | −0.49 | |
| Ratings * | 3 (10) | 11 (36.7) | 12 (40) | 4 (13.3) | 2.57 | 0.84 | 1.86 | −0.6 | |
|
| Motivation | 4 (13.8) | 7 (24.1) | 13 (44.8) | 5 (17.2) | 2.66 | 0.92 | 1.8 | −0.7 |
| Autonomy | 2 (6.9) | 4 (13.8) | 11 (37.9) | 12 (41.1) | 3.14 | 0.9 | 2.38 | −0.09 | |
| Critical | 5 (17.2) | 9 (31) | 11 (37.9) | 4 (13.8) | 2.48 | 0.93 | 1.59 | −0.88 | |
| Resolution | 4 (13.8) | 6 (20.7) | 10 (34.5) | 9 (31) | 2.83 | 1.02 | 1.79 | −0.94 | |
| Class time | 3 (10.3) | 6 (20.7) | 12 (41.4) | 8 (27.6) | 2.86 | 0.94 | 1.99 | −0.64 | |
| Teacher | 3 (10.3) | 5 (17.2) | 10 (34.5) | 11 (37.9) | 3 | 0.98 | 2.04 | −0.63 | |
| Classmates | 2 (6.9) | 4 (13.8) | 12 (41.1) | 11 (37.9) | 3.1 | 0.88 | 2.38 | −0.06 | |
| Content | 4 (13.8) | 8 (27.6) | 13 (44.8) | 4 (13.8) | 2.59 | 0.89 | 1.78 | −0.67 | |
| Ratings * | 4 (13.8) | 9 (31) | 12 (41.4) | 4 (13.8) | 2.55 | 0.89 | 1.74 | −0.73 | |
* Sample grouping of ratings (min: 0; max: 10) was carried out based on the following criteria: none: 0–4.9; few: 5–5.9; enough: 6–8.9; completely: 9–10. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 1Intergroup comparison in attitudinal dimension.
Figure 2Intergroup comparison in interactive dimension.
Study of the value of independence between control and experimental groups.
| Variables | Group, M (SD) | M2−M1 | Student’s t |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Experimental | |||||||
|
| Motivation | 2 (0.89) | 2.73 (1.03) | 0.73 | 2.89 (58) | 0.005 | −0.758 | −0.354 |
| Autonomy | 1.9 (0.91) | 2.57 (0.88) | 0.67 | 2.55 (58) | 0.014 | −0.748 | −0.351 | |
| Critical | 2.2 (0.91) | 2.4 (0.88) | 0.2 | 0.85 (58) | 0.398 | - | - | |
| Resolution | 2.4 (0.95) | 2.7 (0.9) | 0.3 | 1.23 (58) | 0.223 | - | - | |
| Class time | 2.47 (0.88) | 2.67 (0.94) | 0.2 | 0.83 (58) | 0.408 | - | - | |
| Teacher | 1.73 (0.89) | 2.97 (0.91) | 1.24 | 5.21 (58) | <0.001 | −1.378 | −0.567 | |
| Classmates | 1.8 (0.65) | 3.03 (0.87) | 1.23 | 6.08 (58) | <0.001 | −1.602 | −0.625 | |
| Content | 2.23 (0.84) | 2.5 (0.81) | 0.32 | 1.23 (58) | 0.224 | - | - | |
| Ratings | 2.33 (0.79) | 2.57 (0.84) | 0.24 | 1.09 (58) | 0.281 | - | - | |
|
| Motivation | 1.87 (0.85) | 2.66 (0.92) | 0.79 | 3.36 (57) | 0.001 | −0.892 | −0.407 |
| Autonomy | 2.17 (0.9) | 3.14 (0.9) | 0.97 | 4.08 (57) | <0.001 | −1.078 | −0.474 | |
| Critical | 2.2 (0.87) | 2.48 (0.93) | 0.28 | 1.18 (57) | 0.242 | - | - | |
| Resolution | 2.53 (0.96) | 2.83 (1.02) | 0.3 | 1.12 (57) | 0.266 | - | - | |
| Class time | 2.33 (0.87) | 2.86 (0.94) | 0.53 | 2.21 (57) | 0.031 | −0.585 | −0.281 | |
| Teacher | 1.57 (0.76) | 3 (0.98) | 1.43 | 6.14 (57) | <0.001 | −1.631 | −0.632 | |
| Classmates | 1.83 (0.73) | 3.1 (0.88) | 1.27 | 5.89 (57) | <0.001 | −1.571 | −0.618 | |
| Content | 2.1 (0.83) | 2.59 (0.89) | 0.49 | 2.13 (57) | 0.038 | −0.569 | −0.274 | |
| Ratings | 2.43 (0.76) | 2.55 (0.89) | 0.12 | 0.54 (57) | 0.593 | - | - | |
Source: own elaboration. M1: Mean of the experimental group, M2: Mean of the control group.
Study of the value of independence between experimental groups.
| Variables | Group, M (SD) | M2−M1 | Student’s |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Secondary | ||||||
| Motivation | 2.73 (1.03) | 2.66 (0.92) | −0.07 | 0.3 (57) | 0.764 | - | - |
| Autonomy | 2.57 (0.88) | 3.14 (0.9) | 0.57 | 2.14 (57) | 0.019 | −0.64 | −0.305 |
| Critical | 2.4 (0.88) | 2.48 (0.93) | 0.08 | 0.34 (57) | 0.732 | - | - |
| Resolution | 2.7 (0.9) | 2.83 (1.02) | 0.13 | 0.5 (57) | 0.619 | - | - |
| Class time | 2.67 (0.94) | 2.86 (0.94) | 0.19 | 0.78 (57) | 0.436 | - | - |
| Teacher | 2.97 (0.91) | 3 (0.98) | 0.03 | 0.13 (57) | 0.895 | - | - |
| Classmates | 3.03 (0.87) | 3.1 (0.88) | 0.07 | 0.3 (57) | 0.765 | - | - |
| Content | 2.5 (0.81) | 2.59 (0.89) | 0.09 | 0.53 (57) | 0.598 | - | - |
| Ratings | 2.57 (0.84) | 2.55 (0.89) | −0.02 | 0.06 (57) | 0.949 | − | − |
Source: own elaboration. M1: Mean of the Secondary group, M2: Mean of the Primary group.