Claims

Flipped classroom combined with active-learning activities yields higher pooled exam scores than flipped classroom with minimal discussion in introductory A&P

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Students in the active-learning flipped condition outperformed the minimal-discussion control on pooled exam grades (76.8 vs 67.8, p<0.001). → Maria Entezari & Mohammad Javdan 2016

Evidence

Maria Entezari & Mohammad Javdan 2016

Maria Entezari & Mohammad Javdan. (2016). Active Learning and Flipped Classroom, Hand in Hand Approach to Improve Students Learning in Human Anatomy and Physiology. International Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 5, No. 4. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v5n4p222

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental comparison of pooled grades on three multiple-choice exams between the active-learning treatment (n=32) and control (n=34) groups, both taught by the same instructor. The treatment group averaged "76.8 ± 1.89" vs "67.8 ± 1.88", p<0.001; no effect size was printed.

"Students’ performance was significantly better in the treatment group for all combining data of the three exams [Mean ± SE; 76.8 ± 1.89 in the treatment group vs 67.8 ± 1.88 in the control group, p<0.001]."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.