You are here:

Learning Designs using Flipped Classroom Instruction | Conception d’apprentissage l’aide de l’instruction en classe inverse

, ,

CJLT Volume 41, Number 2, ISSN 1499-6677 e-ISSN 1499-6677 Publisher: Canadian Network for Innovation in Education


The flipped classroom is an instructional model that leverages technology-enhanced instruction outside of class time in order to maximize student engagement and learning during class time. As part of an action research study, the authors synthesize reflections about three learning designs and how the flipped classroom model can support teaching, learning and assessment through: (1) guided collaborative discussion, (2) tabletop white boarding and (3) the development of augmented reality auras. Principles for teaching effectiveness are used as a lens to guide the reflection on the benefits and challenges with each of the learning designs. Findings suggest that flipped classroom models that emphasize collaborative learning, group work and accessibility can enable and support inquiry-based learning. Recommendations are provided for educators interested in designing learning using a flipped classroom instructional model, as well as suggestions for future action research agendas. La classe inverse est un modle pdagogique qui met profit l’apprentissage hors des heures en classe et qui est rehauss par la technologie pour maximiser l’engagement et l’apprentissage des apprenants en classe. Dans le cadre de cette tude de recherche-action, les auteurs rsument les rflexions sur la faon dont le modle de la classe inverse peut appuyer l’enseignement, l’apprentissage et l’valuation par la mise en œuvre de trois conceptions d’apprentissage par investigation : 1) discussion collaborative guide, 2) tableau blanc de table et 3) dveloppement d’auras en ralit augmente. Les principes d’enseignement de l’efficacit sont utiliss comme optique guidant la rflexion sur les avantages et les dfis de chacune des conceptions d’apprentissage. Les conclusions suggrent que les modles de classes inverses qui mettent l’accent sur l’apprentissage collaboratif, le travail en groupe et l’accessibilit peuvent permettre et appuyer l’apprentissage par investigation. Des recommandations sont fournies pour les ducateurs qui s’intressent la conception pdagogique l’aide d’un modle de classe inverse, ainsi que des suggestions pour la recherche-action future.


Mazur, A., Brown, B. & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Learning Designs using Flipped Classroom Instruction | Conception d’apprentissage l’aide de l’instruction en classe inverse. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 41(2),. Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. Retrieved March 24, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Alberta Education. (2011). Career and technology studies. Retrieved from
  2. Alberta Education. (2010). Inspiring education: A dialogue with Albertans. Alberta, Canada: Alberta Education.
  3. Alberta Learning (2000). English language arts (K-9). Retrieved from
  4. An, Y., & Reigeluth, C. (2012). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms: K-12 teachers' beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal Of Digital Learning In Teacher Education, 28(2), 54-62.
  5. Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385.
  6. Baker, J.W. (2000, April). The "classroom flip": Using web course management tools to become the guide by the side. Selected Papers from the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, Jacksonville, Florida, USA, 9-17.
  7. Bergmann, J. & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class everyday. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  8. Bloom, B., Engelhart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay.
  9. Brown, J. & Adler, R. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0.
  10. Brunsell, E. & Horejsi, M. (2013). Science 2.0: “Flipping” your classroom in one “take”. The Science Teacher 8(3), 8.
  11. Bull, G., Ferster, B. & Kjellstrom, W. (2012, August). Inventing the flipped classroom. Leading& Learning with Technology, 40(1), 10-11. Retrieved from
  12. Cornelius-White, J. & Harbaugh, A. (2010). Learner-centered instruction: Building relationships for student success. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  13. Creswell, J.W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
  14. DeZure, D., Kaplan, M., and Deerman, M. (2001), Research on student notetaking: Implications for faculty and graduate student instructors. Retrieved from
  15. Driscoll, T. (2012). Flipped learning and democratic education: The complete report. Retrieved from
  16. Earl, L. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin-Sage.
  17. Friesen, S. (2013). Inquiry based learning. In R.C. Richey (Ed.) Encyclopedia of terminology for educational and communications and technology (pp. 153-155). New York, NY:
  18. Friesen, S. & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: A review of the literature. Retrieved from
  19. Foertsch, J., Moses, G., Strikwerda, J. & Litzkow, M. (2002). Reversing the lecture/homework paradigm using eTeach web-based streaming video software. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(3), 267-74.
  20. Gagnon G. & Collay, M. (2006). Constructivist learning design: Key questions for teaching to standards. London, UK: Corwin Press.
  21. Galileo Education Network (2013). Discipline-based inquiry rubric. Retrieved from
  22. Gannod, G., Burge, J. & Helmick, M. (2008, May). Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering. Paper presented at the meeting of the 2008 IEEE International Conference of Software Engineering, Leipzig, Germany.
  23. Government of Alberta. (2010). Budget 2010, striking the right balance, education business plan 2010-13. Retrieved from
  24. Haar, J., Hall, G., Schoepp, P. & Smith, D. (2000). How teachers teach students with different learning styles. The ClearingHouse 75(3), 142-145.
  25. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problembased and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.
  26. Jacobsen, M. & Friesen, S. (2013). Hands on vs. Hands up: Technology-enabled knowledge building in high school. Canada Education, 53(3). Retrieved from DASHDASH
  27. Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K. & Robison, A.J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from
  28. Johnson, G. (2013). Student perceptions of the flipped classroom (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of BC – Okanagan, Kelowna, BC. Retrieved from df?sequence=1
  29. Kay, R. & Edwards, J (2012). Examining the use of worked example video podcasts in middle school mathematics classrooms: A formative analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology 38(2), 1-20.
  30. Klein, J., Tavera, S., King, S., Commitante, A., Curtis-Bey, L. & Stripling, B. (2011). Projectbased learning: Inspiring middle school students to engage in deep and active learning. Retrieved from
  31. Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43.
  32. Milligan, D. (2013). The charter for children: A new book series for every Canadian. Ottawa, ON: DC Canada Education Publishing.
  33. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108(6), 1017-1054.
  34. Parsons, J., Hewson, K., Adrian, L. & Day, D. (2013). Engaging in action research: A practical guide to teacher-conducted research for educators and school leaders. Edmonton, AB: Brush Education
  35. Pitt, J. And Kirkwood, K. (2010). How can I improve junior level mathematics achievement using constructivism? Ontario Action Researcher 10(3). Retrieved from
  36. Prober C., & Heath C (2012). Lecture halls without lectures– a proposal for medical education. New England Journal of Medicine. 366(18), 1657-59.
  37. Puentedura, R. (2009). Transformation, technology, and education. Retrieved from
  38. Seery, M. (2010). Using pre-lecture resources in your teaching: A short guide. Retrieved from:
  39. Sesen, B., & Tarhan, L. (2011). Active-learning versus teacher-centered instruction for learning acids and bases. Research in Science& Technological Education, 29(2), 205-226.
  40. Ullman, E. (2013). Tips to help flip your classroom: Teachers offer their strategies for making the most out of the flipped classroom model. ASCD Education Update, 55(2), 1-5.
  41. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.
  42. Wiske, S., Rennebohm Franz, K., & Breit, L. (2005). Teaching for understanding with technology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  43. Yarbro, J., Arfstrom, K., McKnight, K., & McKnight, B. (2014). Extension of a review of flipped learning. Retrieved from
  44. Zappe, S., Leicht, R., Messner, J., Litzinger, T., & Lee, H.W. (2009). Flipping the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education. Retrieved from H%2Fconference%2F19%2FAC%25202009Full92.pdf&index=conference_papers&spa ce=129746797203605791716676178&type=application%2Fpdf&charset=

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact