Flipped classroom interventions show no reliable average gain in student satisfaction after bias correction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The initial satisfaction effect is small (Hedges' g = 0.16) but trim-and-fill yields −0.03, indicating little influence on satisfaction. → Torstein Låg 2019

Evidence¶

Torstein Låg 2019¶

Torstein Låg, Rannveig Grøm Sæle. (2019). Does the Flipped Classroom Improve Student Learning and Satisfaction? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. AERA Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419870489

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of 69 samples measuring student satisfaction. The article reports the initial "summary estimate changes from 0.16 to −0.03" after trim-and-fill, and notes many effect sizes favored the control condition; variation in satisfaction measurement may have contributed to the equivocal result.

"After applying trim and fill to the satisfaction outcome analysis, the summary estimate changes from 0.16 to −0.03 (95% CI [−0.14, 0.08]), indicating that, on average, flipped classroom interventions may have little influence on student satisfaction."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Flipped classroom interventions produce a small positive effect on continuous learning outcomes, around one fifth of a standard deviation after correcting for small-study bias — related
• Evidence of small-study effects exists for cognition and motivation, but trim-and-fill adjustment leaves the moderate motivating effect essentially unchanged — related
• Flipped learning has a medium positive effect on students' academic achievement in Turkish experimental studies after publication-bias correction (Hedges's g = 0.713) — related