Using a flipped classroom teaching and learning approach to promote scientific literacy skill development and retention

Abstract

The development of scientific literacy (SL) skills is critical in the life sciences. A flipped classroom reverses traditional learning spaces such that foundational knowledge is acquired by students independently through recorded lectures and/or readings in advance of the lecture period and knowledge is consolidated through active learning activities in the classroom. A flipped classroom learning environment can promote critical skill development and knowledge application, and therefore, could enhance SL skill development. The objectives here were to (a) determine the effect of a flipped classroom learning environment on SL skill development in second-year kinesiology students enrolled in a research methods course and (b) reassess SL skills 4 months later. SL skills were assessed using the validated test of scientific literacy skills (TOSLS) questionnaire at the start and end of the semester (n = 57) and reassessed 4 months later after the summer semester break (n = 46). During the flipped classroom semester, practical SL skills (TOSLS scores) were increased by 16.3% and TOSLS scores were positively correlated with the students' final grade (r = 0.526, P < 0.001). Four months later, average TOSLS scores significantly decreased compared to the levels at the end of the flipped classroom learning experience. Importantly, retention of SL skills (i.e., 4 months later TOSLS scores) were related to learning approach scores and were positively correlated with deep learning approach scores (r = 0.298, P = 0.044) and negatively correlated with surface learning approach scores (r = -0.314, P = 0.034). Therefore, SL skill retention was higher in students utilizing a deep learning approach (e.g., engaged, self-regulation in learning, and seeking a deeper understanding of concepts) and lower in students utilizing a surface learning approach (e.g., limited engagement, rote memorization of concepts). Collectively, the results demonstrate the value of a flipped classroom in promoting SL skills while highlighting the role of students' learning approach in critical skill retention.

Keywords: flipped classroom; learning approach; scientific literacy; skill retention.

Fig. 1

Study timeline depicting the flipped classroom learning environment in the Research Methods course in the Winter 2023. Practical scientific literacy skills were assessed using the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) in an online quiz that was concurrent with the online surveys at the start and end of the semester (weeks 1 and 12, respectively). Practical SL skills were reassessed using TOSLS 4 months after completion of the course.

Fig. 2

Distribution of students' self‐assessed scientific literacy skill competency (ranging from insufficient to high) at the start (black bars) and end (gray bars) of the semester.

Fig. 3

Changes in deep and surface learning approach total, motive, and strategy scores between the start (Survey #1, black bars) and the end (Survey #2, gray bars) of the flipped classroom semester. Bars represent mean values ± SEM. Data were analyzed by a paired t‐test and bars marked with an asterisk (*) denote statistically significant differences between the start and end of the semester (P ≤ 0.05).

Fig. 4

Changes in practical scientific literacy skills (i.e., % of questions correctly answered Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) Score) over time between the start of the Winter 2023 semester (black bars), end of the Winter 2023 semester (gray bars), and 4 months later at the start of the Fall 2023 semester (white bars). Bars represent mean values ± SEM. Data were analyzed by one‐way ANOVA followed by Tukey's range test and bars not sharing a lowercase letter (a or b) are different (P ≤ 0.05).

Fig. 5

Scatterplots depicting correlative relationships between students' overall Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) scores reassessed at the start of the Fall 2023 semester (i.e., 4 months after the flipped classroom learning environment) and learning approach scores. (A) Surface learning total score, (B) surface strategy score, (C) surface motive score, (D) deep learning total score, (E) deep strategy score, and (F) deep motive scores. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and P‐values are shown.