Abstract

This study aims to develop and understand what motivates university students to use asynchronous pre-class online video lectures (AOVL) for flipped classroom instruction. The study was conducted using a mixed-method research approach. A post-questionnaire survey and a focus group interview were employed in collecting qualitative data. A total of 31 respondents answered questionnaires and 10 respondents were interviewed in a focus group discussion. The quantitative result of the descriptive analysis indicates that students had positive perceptions in terms of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. Besides, Pearson r correlation analysis shows a strong correlation between the whole constructs (i.e., between perceived autonomy and competence = 0.618, autonomy and relatedness = 0.939, and competence and relatedness = 0.747). Consistently, the interview discussion also reveals that the use of AOVL had successfully promoted students’ learning motivation both in and outside of the classroom. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis and three key themes were identified, namely; (a) students’ mastery of content materials outside of the classroom (b) students’ interaction with peers and instructor, and (c) students’ learning autonomy. Conclusions from this study confirmed that the use of AOVL in the flip-class setting had successfully promoted students’ intrinsic needs based on self-determination theory (SDT) perspectives, namely: perceived competence, relatedness, and autonomy.

Keywords

References

• Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1-14.
• Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269-283.
• Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Before You Flip, Consider This. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 25-25.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
• Chaiprasurt, C., & Esichaikul, V. (2013). Enhancing motivation in online courses with mobile communication tool support: A comparative study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 377-401.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
• Dey, P., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (2019). Blended learning to improve quality of primary education among underprivileged school children in India. Education and Information Technologies, 24(3), 1995-2016.
• Hasse, C. (2019). Learning Matter: The Force of Educational Technologies in Cultural Ecologies. In Material Practice and Materiality: Too Long Ignored in Science Education (pp. 217-229). Springer, Cham.
• Hung, H. (2014). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning,28(1), 81-96.
• Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50.
• Lee, Y., Lee, J., & Hwang, Y. (2015). Relating motivation to information and communication technology acceptance: Self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior,51, 418-428.
• Little, C. (2015). The flipped classroom in further education: literature review and case study. Research in Post-Compulsory Education,20(3), 265-279.
• Love, B., Hodge, A., Corritore, C., & Ernst, D. C. (2015). Inquiry-based learning and the flipped classroom model. PRIMUS, 25(8), 745-762.
• Loveys, B. R., & Riggs, K. M. (2019). Flipping the laboratory: improving student engagement and learning outcomes in second year science courses. International Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 64-79.
• Nguyen, T. (2018). Implementation of English flipped classrooms: Students’ perceptions and teacher’s reflection. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 7(3), 87-108.
• Shi, Y., Ma, Y., MacLeod, J., & Yang, H. H. (2019). College students’ cognitive learning outcomes in flipped classroom instruction: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Journal of Computers in Education. Advance online publication: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00142-8
• Sørebø, Ø., Halvari, H., Gulli, V. F., & Kristiansen, R. (2009). The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers’ motivation to continue to use e-learning technology. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1177-1187.
• Sun, J. C., & Wu, Y. (2016). Analysis of Learning Achievement and Teacher–Student Interactions in Flipped and Conventional Classrooms. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(1), 79-99.
• Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (2017). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults. John Wiley & Sons.
• Yu, Z. (2019). Mobile Device-and video-aided flipped English classrooms. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 11(2), 19-32.
• Yusuf, B., & Nur, A. H. B. (2019). Pedagogical orientation in the fourth ındustrial revolution: flipped classroom model. In Redesigning Higher Education Initiatives for Industry 4.0 (pp. 85-104). Beijing: IGI Global.
• Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2018). Supporting students’ self-directed learning in the flipped classroom through the LMS TES BlendSpace. On the Horizon, 26(4), 281-290.
• Zainuddin, Z., & Perera, C. J. (2019). Exploring students’ competence, autonomy and relatedness in the flipped classroom pedagogical model. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), 115-126.

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.