Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Print this page Email this page Users Online: 6507

  Table of Contents  
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 460-461  

Strengths and challenges of flipped classroom: A blended learning approach

Department of Community Medicine, IPGMER and SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Date of Submission10-Feb-2021
Date of Decision18-Feb-2021
Date of Acceptance20-Feb-2021
Date of Web Publication10-May-2022

Correspondence Address:
Mausumi Basu
Department of Community Medicine, IPGMER and SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/mjdrdypu.mjdrdypu_111_21

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Basu M. Strengths and challenges of flipped classroom: A blended learning approach. Med J DY Patil Vidyapeeth 2022;15:460-1

How to cite this URL:
Basu M. Strengths and challenges of flipped classroom: A blended learning approach. Med J DY Patil Vidyapeeth [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 11];15:460-1. Available from: https://www.mjdrdypv.org/text.asp?2022/15/4/460/345006

The concept of “flipped classroom” was developed by Jon (Jonathan) Bergmann, a chemistry teacher and his fellow chemistry teacher Aaron Sams.[1]

As per The Flipped Learning Network, 2014, a Flipped Classroom (FC), also called an “Inverted Classroom” is a student-centered peer-assisted learning which is defined as “pedagogical method, 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.”[2]

In this type of blended learning, the traditional class is “flipped,” i.e., reversed where students speaks more for their doubt clearance, which was proved to be effective in medical education by earlier review studies.[3]

In this relatively straightforward concept, there are two components – out-of-class and within class-classroom lecture and homework components are reversed: what is done conventionally within-class is done outside class (at home) before the class session by visualizing instructional videos, whereas what is done as homework is done within-class on problem-solving and discussion under the guidance of the teacher.

In the era of eLearning, the FCs model is gaining popularity day by day specially in the COVID-19 pandemic. During COVID-19 lockdown, virtual FC can be accessed anywhere the student has Internet access, 24 h a day, 7 days a week; provided freedom for students to engage in discussions and analysis in smaller groups than would normally occur in a classroom setting which also allowed teachers to connect with students in even deeper, more authentic ways despite the distance.

The Four Pillars of F-L-I-P™ are:[2]

  1. Flexible environment – students choose when and where they learn and educators who flip their classes are flexible in their expectations of student timelines for learning
  2. Learning culture – from teacher-centered model to a learner-centered approach
  3. Intentional content – teachers determine what they need to teach and adopt methods of student-centered, active learning strategies
  4. Professional educator – who continuously observe the students, giving relevant feedback, assess their work, reflective in their practice, connect with each other accept constructive criticism, and tolerate controlled chaos.

In conventional teaching–learning process, lower levels of Revised Bloom's Taxonomy of cognitive domain (such as remembering and understanding) done in classroom, and students work on activities which involve higher level of learning outside the class, whereas in the FC, students are able to complete the lower levels of cognitive work outside the classroom so that when they come to class, they can focus on higher cognitive levels (applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating) with the support of their peers and guidance of their teacher.

The FC model is spreading because it is a win-win situation for both students and teachers and the benefits are:

  1. It improve learning performance of students[4]
  2. Flexible and individualized learning
  3. Increase interactions
  4. Enhance student satisfaction, engagement, and enjoyment.[5],[6]

For flipping a classroom, there are “6 easy steps” wrote by Jeff Dunn (2014)[7]

  • Step 1: Plan – a lesson in particular with the key learning outcomes
  • Step 2: Record – create the content, record a screencast, make a video
  • Step 3: Share – with the students by sending the video
  • Step 4: Confirm: That students have viewed the content
  • Step 5: Group and monitor – separate into groups where students are given a task
  • Step 6: Debrief and regroup – share the individual group's work with everyone.

Finally – Review, Revise, and Repeat.

In a FC, “content delivery” may be by video lessons, assignments, self-evaluation tests, online collaborative discussions, digital research, and text readings. The ideal length for the video lesson should be 8–12 min.

However, there are some challenges of a FC which include:

  1. Teachers have to be willing to be flexible
  2. Limited student preparation
  3. More time and work for students[8]
  4. Inability to get immediate help/feedback
  5. Poor quality video content[9]
  6. More time for teachers.[7]

  References Top

Bergmann J, Sams A. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. 1st ed. International Society for Technology in Education: Washington DC, United States;2012. p. 2 33.  Back to cited text no. 1
Flipped Learning Network (FLN). The Four Pillars of F-L-I-P™; 2014. Available from: https://flippedlearning.org/definition-of-flipped-learning. [Last accessed on 2021 Feb 07].  Back to cited text no. 2
Chen F, Lui AM, Martinelli SM. A systematic review of the effectiveness of flipped classrooms in medical education. Med Educ 2017;51:585-97.  Back to cited text no. 3
Eichler JF, Peeples J. Flipped classroom modules for large enrollment general chemistry courses: A low barrier approach to increase active learning and improve student grades. Chem Educ Res Pract 2016;17:197-208.  Back to cited text no. 4
Al-Zahrani AM. From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students' creative thinking. Br J Educ Technol 2015;46:1133-48.  Back to cited text no. 5
Bösner S, Pickert J, Stibane T. Teaching differential diagnosis in primary care using an inverted classroom approach: Student satisfaction and gain in skills and knowledge. BMC Med Educ 2015;15:63.  Back to cited text no. 6
Dunn J. The 6-step guide to flipping your classroom 2014.Available from http://dailygenius.com/flipped.[ Last accessed on 2021 February 08].  Back to cited text no. 7
Chen Y, Wang Y, Chen NS. Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? Comput Educ 2014;79:16-27.  Back to cited text no. 8
He W, Holton A, Farkas G, Warschauer M. The effects of flipped instruction on out-of-class study time, exam performance, and student perceptions. Learn Instr 2016;45:61-71.  Back to cited text no. 9


    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded65    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal