Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Science Process Skills in an Inquiry-Based Flipped Classroom Environment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2020.17.1.7Keywords:
Flipped classroom, conceptual understanding, science process skillsAbstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of an Inquiry-based Flipped classroom model on the conceptual understanding and science process skills of junior high school students in the Philippines.
Method: A two-group pretest/post-test design was conducted on 55 Grade 9 students for the study. One group received instruction using the flipped classroom format while the other group serving as control was taught in the conventional format. A Conceptual Understanding Test (CUT) and a Science Process Skills Test (SPST) were used to measure the impact of instruction on the two groups. Independent samples t-test was used to determine if there was a significant difference between the groups while paired samples t-test was conducted on both groups to determine if the groups improved significantly after a 7-week intervention. Linear regression was performed to determine if science process skills was a positive predictor of conceptual understanding.
Findings: Inquiry-based flipped classroom did not make students perform better than the non-flipped inquiry-based learning environment in the Conceptual Understanding Test (CUT) and Science Process Skills Test (SPST) except on one biology topic (non-Mendelian Genetics) where the Flipped Inquiry Group scored significantly higher than the control in the CUT. Students’ science process skills positively predicted their conceptual understanding in biology.
Significance: Inquiry–based flipped classroom can be as effective as the non-flipped inquiry-based instruction in improving students’ conceptual understanding and science process skills but can be made even more effective depending on the content, the manner the content is uploaded and the choice of LMS for uploading the online content. The study also showed the importance of science process skills in enhancing students’ conceptual understanding in biology.
References
Abungu, H. E., Okere, M.I.O., & Wachanga, S.W. (2014). The effect of science process skills teaching approach on secondary school students’ achievement in chemistry in Nyando District, Kenya. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(6), 359-371. doi:10.5901/jesr.2014.v4n6p359
Amresh, A., Carberry, A. R., & Femiani, J. (2013). Evaluating the effectiveness of flipped classrooms for teaching CS1. Paper presented at Frontiers in Education Conference. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. doi:10.1109/ FIE.2013.6684923
Artun, H., & Costu, B. (2012). Effect of the 5E model on prospective teachers’ conceptual understanding of diffusion and osmosis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 1-10. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9371-2
Aydogdu, B. (2015). The investigation of science process skills of science teachers in terms of some variables. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(5), 582-594. doi: 10.5897/ ERR2015.2097
Bahr, D. L., & de Garcia, L. A. (2010). Elementary mathematics is anything but elementary. Belmont CA: Cengage Learning.
Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cogntive Sciences, 7(2), 84-91. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00029-3
Bayram, Z., Oskay, O. O., Erdem, E., Ozgur, S. D., & Sen, S. (2013). Effect of inquiry-based learning method on student motivation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 988-996. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.112
Bergman, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class everyday. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Flip-Your-Classroom.aspx.
Borg, M. O., & Shapiro, S. L. (1996). Personality type and student performance in principles of economics. The Journal of Economic Education, 27(1), 3-25. doi:10.2307/1183005
Cohen, B., & Murphy, G. L. (1984). Models of concepts. Cognitive Science, 8(1), 27-58. doi: 10.1207/s155 16709cog0801_2
Du, S. C., Fu, Z. T., & Wang, Y. (2014, April). The flipped classroom – advantages and challenges. Paper presented at the International Conference on Economic Management and Trade Cooperation, Xi’an, China.
Duran, M., & Dokme, I. (2016). The effect of the inquiry-based learning approach on students’ critical thinking skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 12(12), 2887-2908. doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2016.02311a
Edward, C. N., Asirvatham, D., & Johar, M. G. M. (2019). The impact of teaching oriental music using blended learning approach. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 16(1), 81-103. Retrieved from http://mjli.uum.edu.my/ images/vol.16no.1/81-103.pdf
Egger, A. E. (2009). How do I teach the process of science? Pedagogy in action. Retrieved from https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/ process_of_science/how_process_science.html.
Foogooa, R., & Ferdinand-James, D. (2017). Use of Facebook for enhancing student engagement in a higher education blended engineering course. Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences, 10(1), 8-30. doi: 10.12959/issn.1855-0541. IIASS-2017-no1-art1
Gee, K. A., & Wong, K. K. (2012). A cross national examination of inquiry and its relationship to student performance in science: Evidence from the program for International StudentAssessment (PISA) 2006. International Journal of Education Research, 53, 303-318. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0883035512000365?np=y.
Gilboy, M., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(1), 109-114. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/ S1499404614006381#.
Handam, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013). A review of flipped learning [PDFfile]. Retrieved from http://www.flippedlearning.org/review.
Harlen, W., & Allende, J. E. (2009). Teacher professional development in pre-secondary school inquiry -based science education. Santiago Chile: Fundacion para Estudios Biomedicos Avanzados de la Facultad de Medicina. Retrieved from http://www.interacademies.net/File.aspx?id=9348.
Jamaludin, R., & Osman, S. Z. (2014). The use of a flipped classroom to enhance engagement and promote active learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(2), 124-131. Retrieved from http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/10648.
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2010). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77-87. doi:10.1080/0305569032000159750
Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. D. (2014). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 14, 1-12. doi:10.1187/ cbe.14-08 -0129
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173. doi: 10.1016/j. compedu.2014.05.009
Koniceck-Moran, R., & Keeley, P. (2015). Teaching for conceptual understanding in science. NSTA Press: Arlington.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683-706.
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43. doi:10.1080/00220480009596759.
Love, B., Hodge, Grandgenett, N., & Swift, A. W. (2014). Student learning and perceptions in a Flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 45(3), 317-324. doi:10.1080/0020739X.20 13.822582
Love, B., Hodge, A., Corritore, C., & Ernst, D. C. (2015). Inquiry-based learning and the flipped classroom model. PRIMUS, 25(8), 745-762. doi: 10.1080/10511970.2015.1046005
Malefyane, T., Hofman, A., Winnips, K., & Beetsma, Y. (2014). The impact of interactive engagement methods on students’academic achievement. Higher Education Research and Development, 33(5), 1020-1034. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2014.890571.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Musallam, R. (2013). A pedagogy-first approach to the flipped classroom. OnCue Journal, 35(1), 6-8. Retrieved from http://www.cue.org/sites/cue.org/files/images/Spring13OnCUE.pdf
Mzoughi, T. (2015). An investigation of student web activity in a “flipped” introductory physics class. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 235-240. doi:10.1016/j. sbspro.2015.04.558
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_ id=9596&page=25
Ogunbase, A. O. (2016). Pedagogical design and pedagogical usability of web-based learning environments: Comparative cultural implications from Africa and Europe (Academic Dissertation). School of Information Sciences, Tampere, Finland.
Ostlund, K. (1998). What the research says about the science process skills. Electronic Journal of Science Education. Retrieved from http://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/7589/5356.
Padilla, M. J. (1990). The science process skills. Research matters to the science teacher, 9004. Retrieved from https://www.narst. org/publications/research/skill.cfm.
Sari, P. M., Sudargo, F., & Priyandoko, D. (2018). Correlation among science process skill, concept comprehension, and scientific attitude on regulation system materials. Presented at 1st International Conference of Education on Sciences, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. (2017). Jakarta, Indonesia. United Kingdom: IOP Publishing.
Sawyer, R. K. (2008). Optimising learning: Implications of learning science research. Innovating to learn, learning to innovate. (pp. 45-65). doi: 10.1787/9789264047983-en
Shahnaz, S. M. F., & Hussain, R. M. R. (2016). Designing instruction for active and reflective learners in the flipped classroom. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 147-173. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ1134740.pdf
Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60’s on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 127-144.
Shymansky, J. A., Kyle Jr., W. C., & Alport, J. M. (1983). The effects of new science curricula on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(5), 387-404.
Simsek, P., & Kabapinar, F. (2010). The effects of inquiry-based learning on elementary students’ conceptual understanding of matter, scientific process skills, and science attitudes. Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1190-1194. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S1877042810002107#
The Ohio Academy of Science. (2007). The Ohio core curriculum: What’s required for science. Retrieved from http://www. ohiosci.org.
Tomera, A. N. (1974). Transfer and retention of transfer of the science process of observation and comparison in junior high school students. Science Education, 58(2), 195-203. doi: 10.1002/ sce. 3730580209.
Trowbridge, L. W., & Bybee, R. W. (1996). Teaching secondary school science. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Viennot, L. (2008). Learning and conceptual understanding: Beyond simplistic ideas, what have we learned? In M. Vincentini, & E. Sassi (Eds.), Connecting research in physics education with teacher education (pp. 1-17). International and Pan American Copyright Conventions: International Commission on Physics Education. Retrieved from http://iupap-icpe.org/publications/teach2/index.html.
Waltje, J. (2014). Language learning technology review. The IALLT Journal, 44(1), 85-94. Retrieved from https://ialltjournal.org/ index.php/ialltjournal/article/viewFile/80/71.
Warter-Perez, N., & Dong, J. (2012). Flipping the classroom: How to embed inquiry and design projects into a digital engineering lecture. Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE PSW Section Conference. Retrieved from http://aseepsw2012.calpoly.edu/ site_media/uploads/proceedings/papers/10B_35_ASEE_ PSW_2012_Warter-Perez.pdf
Weisberg, R. (2006). Expertise and reason in creative thinking: Evidence from case studies and the laboratory. In J. Kaufman, & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development (pp. 7-42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511606915.003
Williams, D., & Whiting, A. (2016). Exploring the relationship between student engagement, Twitter, and a learning management system: A study of undergraduate marketing students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 28(3), 302-313.
Wright, S. (2012, October 12). The flip: end of a love affair. Powerful Learning Practice. Retrieved from http://plpnetwork. com/2012/10/08/flip-love-affair/
Yerrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to promote deeply rooted change: The “filtering effects” of teachers’ beliefs on understanding transformational views of teaching science. Science Education, 81(2), 137-159.
Yong, D., Levy, R., & Lape, N. (2015). Why no difference? A controlled flipped classroom study for an introductory differential equations course. PRIMUS, 25(9-10), 907-921.
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
Research impact
Harvested 2026-10-19Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.
