Document Type : Research article


1 PhD Candidate, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of English, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran


The current study investigates the effect of flipped instruction on writing self-efficacy and writing performance of Medical students at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Fifty students participated in this experimental study. They were assigned as the treatment group consisted of 25 students and the control group 25 students. The control group (the non-flipped classroom) was taught using traditional writing instruction, whereas the experimental group (the flipped classroom) was taught in a flipped learning mode. The questionnaire used in this study was adapted from Prickel’s research (1994) and was scored based on the Likert scale for the writing self-efficacy. The data were gathered in a Pretest-Treatment-Posttest design. The results revealed that flipped instruction had a more positive effect on improvement of both writing self-efficacy and writing performance of the learners compared to those instructed traditionally. The results in this study extended the view point of EFL teachers to understand novel methods of instruction.


Appendix A

The Analytic Rubric (Jacobs et al., 1981)








EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: knowledgeable • substantive •thorough development of thesis • relevant to assigned topic


GOOD TO AVERAGE: some knowledge of subject • adequate range • limited development of thesis • mostly relevant to topic, but lacks detail


FAIR TO POOR: limited knowledge of subject • little substance •inadequate development of topic


VERY POOR: does not show  knowledge of subject • non-substantive • non pertinent • OR  not enough to evaluate





EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: fluent expression • ideas clearly stated/ supported • succinct • well-organized • logical sequencing • cohesive


GOOD TO AVERAGE: somewhat choppy • loosely organized but main ideas stand out • limited support • logical but incomplete sequencing


FAIR TO POOR:  non-fluent • ideas confused or disconnected • lacks logical sequencing and development


VERY POOR: does not communicate • no organization • OR not enough to evaluate





EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: effective complex constructions • few errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, article, pronouns, prepositions


GOOD TO AVERAGE: effective but simple constructions • minor problems in complex constructions • several errors of agreement, tense, number, word order/function, article, pronouns, prepositions but meaning seldom obscured


FAIR TO POOR: major problems in simple/ complex constructions • frequent errors of negation, tense, number, word order/function, article, pronouns, prepositions and/ or fragments, run-ons, deletions • meaning confused or obscured


VERY POOR: virtually no mastery of sentence construction rules • dominated by errors • does not communicate • OR not enough to evaluate





EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: sophisticated range •effective word/idiom choice and usage • word for mastery • appropriate register


GOOD TO AVERAGE: adequate range • occasional errors  of effective word/idiom form, choice, usage but meaning not obscured


FAIR TO POOR: limited range • frequent  errors  of effective word/idiom form, choice, usage • meaning confused or obscured


VERY POOR: essentially translation • little knowledge of English vocabulary, idioms, word form • OR not enough to evaluate





EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: demonstrates mastery of conventions • few errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing


GOOD TO AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing but meaning not obscured


FAIR TO POOR: frequent errors of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing • poor handwriting • meaning confused or obscured


VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions • dominated by errors of  spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing • handwriting illegible • OR not enough to evaluate



  1. Abedi, P., Namaziandost, E., & Akbari, S. (2019). The impact of flipped classroom instruction on Iranian upper-intermediate EFL learners' writing skill. English Literature and Language Review, 5(9), 164-172.
  2. 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.
  3. Adnan, M. (2017). Perceptions of senior-year ELT students for flipped classroom: A materials development course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(3-4), 204-222.
  4. Al-Bahrani, R. H. (2020). Flipped classroom as a new promoting class management technique. Journal of College of Education/Wasit, 2(39), 591-610.
  5. Alghasab, M. B. (2020). Flipping the writing classroom: Focusing on the pedagogical benefits and EFL learners' perceptions. English Language Teaching, 13(4), 28-40.
  6. AlJaser, A. (2017). Effectiveness of using flipped classroom strategy in academic achievement and self-efficacy among education students of Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 10(14), 67-77.
  7. Allen, K., & Marquez, A. (2011). Teaching vocabulary with visual aids. Journal of Kao Ying Industrial & Commercial Vocational High School, 1(9), 1-5.
  8. Alkhoudary, Y. A. (2019(. Flipping the classroom towards learner autonomy in an EFL writing class [Paper presentation]. The 1st applied linguistics and language teaching conference: Teaching and learning in a globalized world (pp. 47-58). Zayed University Press.
  9. Al-Mekhlafi, M. A. (2011). The relationship between writing self-efficacy beliefs and final examination scores in a writing course among a group of Arab EFL trainee-teachers. International Journal for Research in Education (IJRE), 29, 16-33.
  10. Al-Zahrani, A. (2015). From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students' creative thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1133-1148.
  11. Amogne, D. (2008). An investigation of the correlation among efficacy sources, students’ self-efficacy and performance in reading and writing skills: Bahir Dar University in Focus [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.  http://localhost:80/xmlui/handle/123456789/7607
  12. Asrifan, A. (2015). The use of pictures story in improving students’ ability to write narrative composition. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 3(4), 244-251.
  13. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
  14. Bandura, A. (1986a). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
  15. Bandura, A. (1986b). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
  16. Bartlett, A. (1994). The implications of whole language for classroom management. Action in Teacher Education, 16, 65-74.
  17. Basal, A. (2015). The implementation of a flipped classroom in foreign language teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Education-TOJCE, 16(4), 28-37.
  18. Beach, R. (1989). Showing students how to assess: Demonstrating techniques for response in the writing conference. In C. M. Anson (Ed.), Writing and response, (pp. 127-148). NCTE.
  19. Bless, M. M. (2017). Impact of audio feedback technology on writing instruction [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Walden University, Minneapolis, USA.
  20. Brame, C. (2013). Flipping the classroom. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching.
  21. Brick, B., & Holmes, J. (2008, October). Using screen capture software for student feedback: Towards a methodology using screen capture software for student feedback. [Paper presentation]. The IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2008), Freiburg, Germany.
  22. Brick, B., & Holmes, J. (2014, February). Using screen capture for student feedback. [Paper presentation]. The Eleventh International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Leaning in Digital Age, Porto, PT.
  23. Campbell, B. S., & Feldmann, A. (2017). The power of multimodal feedback. Journal of Curriculum, Teaching, Learning and Leadership in Education, 2(2), 1-6.
  24. Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325.
  25. Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Sage Publications.
  26. Chen, H. (2007). The relationship between EFL learners’ self-efficacy beliefs and performance [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Florida State University, United States.
  27. Chen, M. C., & Lin H. (2009). Self-efficacy, foreign language anxiety as predictors of academic performance among professional program students in a general English proficiency writing test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109(2), 420-430.
  28. Daly, J. A. (1978). Writing apprehension and writing intensity in business and industry. Journal of Educational Research, 72, 10-14.
  29. Daniel, J. (2013). Audio-visual aids in teaching of English. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2(8), 3811-3814.
  30. Davies, R., Dean, D., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development - ETR&D, 61(4), 563-580.
  31. Elian, Sh. & Hamaidi, D. (2018). The effect of using flipped classroom strategy on the academic achievement of fourth grade students in Jordan. IJET, 13(2), 110-125.
  32. Erkan, D. Y., & Saban, A. (2011). Writing performance relative to writing apprehension, self-efficacy in writing, and attitudes towards writing: A correlational study in Turkish tertiary-level EFL. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 13(1), 164-192.
  33. Eshet, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93-106.
  34. Eshet, Y. (2007). Teaching online: Survival skills for the effective teacher. Inroads- The SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(2), 16-20.
  35. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120.
  36. Evans, C. (2016). Enhancing assessment feedback practice in higher education: The EAT framework.  University of Southampton. https://eatframework. org. uk
  37. Evseeva, A., & Solozhenko, A. (2015). Use of flipped classroom teaching in language learning. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 206, 205-209.
  38. Funk, G. D., & Funk, H. D. (1989). Roadblocks to implementing the writing process. Clearing House, 62, 222-224.
  39. Gaumer Erickson, A., & Noonan, P. (2016). College and career competency (CCC) framework needs assessment. University of Kansas, Center for Research on Learning.
  40. Guidry, K. R., Cubillos, J., & Pusecker, K. (2013, May). The connection between self-regulated learning and student success in a hybrid course. In Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum (Vol. 31). http://www. mistakengoal. com/docs/Self-regulated_learning_hybrid_course. pdf.
  41. Halwani, N. (2017). Visual aids and multimedia in second language acquisition.  English Language Teaching, 10(6), 53-56.
  42. Hamdam, N., McKnight, P., McKnight K., & Arfstrom K. M. (2013). The flipped learning model: A white paper based on the literature review titled - A review of flipped learning.
  43. Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51-66.
  44. Hekmatzadeh, M., Khojasteh, L., & Shokrpour, N. (2016). Are emotionally intelligent EFL teachers more satisfied professionally? International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(2), 1-11.
  45. Hengwichitkul, L. (2009). An analysis of errors in English abstracts translated by Thai university graduate students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  46. Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
  47. Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
  48. Jafarigohar, M., Khoshsima, H., Haghighi, H., & Vahdany, H. (2019). Incorporation of flipped learning into EFL classrooms performance and perception. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(3), 1-14.
  49. Jahin, J. H., & Idrees, M. W. (2012). EFL major student teachers’ writing proficiency and attitudes towards learning English. Journal of Taibah University, 4(1), 9-72.
  50. Johnson, G. (2013). Student perceptions of the flipped classroom [Unpublished MA thesis]. University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
  52. Kafipour, R., Mahmoudi, E., & Khojasteh, L. (2018). The effect of task-based language teaching on analytic writing in EFL classrooms. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-16.
  53. Kassem, M. A. M. (2017). Flipping the literature classroom: Fostering EFL students' achievement and autonomy. Wadi El-Nile Journal for Humanitarian, Social and Educational Studies and Research, 14(9), 1-28.
  54. Kaur, C., Singh, S., Mei, T. P., Abdullah, M. S., Mazlini, W., Nor, O., & Mostafa, A. (2017). ESL learners’ perspectives on the use of picture series in teaching guided writing. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 6(4), 74-89.
  55. Khojasteh, L., Shokrpour, N., & Afrasiabi, M. (2016). The relationship between writing self-efficacy and writing performance of Iranian EFL students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(4), 29-37.
  56. Kissau, S., McCullough, H., & Pyke, J. G. (2010). Leveling the playing field: The effects of online second language instruction on student willingness to communicate in French. Calico Journal, 27(2), 277-297.
  57. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
  58. Kurniati, R. (2015). The effectiveness of using pictures on students’ writing of recount Text (A quasi-experimental study at the Tenth Grade Students of SMA Negeri 9 Kota Tangerang Selatan). The Department of Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers Training, Syarif Hidayatullah Atate Islamic University Jakarta.
  59. Lane, J., & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior and Personality, 29(7), 687-694.
  60. Lane, J., Lane, A., & Kyprianou, A. (2004). Self-efficacy, self-esteem and their impact on academic performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 32(3), 247-256.
  61. Lee, S. (2003). Teaching EFL writing in the university: Related issues, insights, and implications. Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 16(1), 111-136.
  62. Lee, S. Y., & Krashen, S. (1997). Writing apprehension in Chinese as a first language. ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics, 115(1), 27-37.
  63. Leis, A., Cooke, S., & Tohei, A. (2015). The effects of flipped classrooms on English composition writing in an EFL environment. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 37-51.
  64. Lindemann, E. (1982). A rhetoric for writing teachers. Oxford University Press.
  65. Marlowe, C. (2012). The effect of the flipped classroom on student achievement and stress. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Montana State University, Bozeman, MN
  66. Mathew, N. G., & Alidmat, A. O. H. (2013). A study on the usefulness of audio-visual aids in EFL classroom: Implications for effective instruction. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 86-91.
  67. McCarthy, P., Meier, S., & Rinderer, R. (1985). Self-efficacy and writing. College Composition and Communication, 36(4), 465-471.
  68. Meier, S., McCarthy, P. R., & Schmeck, R. R. (1984). Validity of self-efficacy as a predictor of writing performance. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8, 107-120.
  69. Mohammadi, J., Barati, H., & Youhanaee, M. (2019). The effectiveness of using flipped classroom model on Iranian EFL learners’ English achievements and their willingness to communicate. English Language Teaching, 12(5), 101-115.
  70. National Institute of Education. (1980). National council on educational research. Fifth report: Fiscal years 1978-1979. National Council on Educational Research No. ED 215-445.
  71. Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
  72. O’Malley, P. J. (2011). Combining screen casting and a tablet PC to deliver personalized student feedback. New Directions, 7, 27-30.
  73. Özkurkudis, M. J., & Bümen, N. T (2019). Flipping the writing classroom: Using grammar videos to enhance writing. Journal of Education and Future, 15, 1-16
  74. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578.
  75. Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and the writing performance of entering high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 33, 163-175.<163::AID-PITS10>3.0.CO;2-C
  76. Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1996). Predictive utility and causal influence of the writing self- efficacy beliefs of elementary students [Paper presentation]. The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Association, New York, NY.
  77. Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1999). Grade level and gender differences in the writing self-beliefs of middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 390-405.
  78. Prickel, D. (1994). The development and validation of a writing self-efficacy scale for adult basic writers and its use in correlational analysis [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Oregon State University.
  79. Qader, R. O., & Yalcin Arslan, F. (2019). The effect of flipped classroom instruction in writing: A case study with Iraqi EFL learners. Teaching English with Technology, 19(1), 36-55.
  80. Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford University Press.
  81. Rattanadilok Na Phuket, P., & Othman, N. B. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ errors in writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32), 99-106.
  82. Ruffini, M. F. (2012). Screencasting to engage learning. Educause Review Online.
  83. Samiee Zafarghandi, M. (2018). The effect of flip learning on students' self-Efficacy and academic achievement. Anthropology of Education eJournal.
  84. Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(34), 207-231.
  85. Sesrica, M., & Jismulatif, A. (2017). The effect of using pictures in teaching writing descriptive text for the second year students of SMPN 1 Siak Hulu.
  86. Shah P. M., Mahmud, W. H., Din R., Yusof, A., & Pardi, K. M. (2011). Self-Efficacy in the writing of Malaysian ESL learners. World Applied Sciences Journal (Innovation and Pedagogy for Lifelong Learning), 15, 8-11.
  87. Shell, D. F., Colvin, C., & Bruning, R. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, attributions, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement level differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 386-398. 10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.386
  88. Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 91-100.
  89. Sirakaya, D., & Ozdemir, S. (2018). The effect of flipped classroom model on academic achievement, self-directed learning readiness, motivation, and retention. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology - MOJEST, 6(1), 76-86.
  90. Soliman, N. A. (2016). Teaching English for academic purposes via the flipped learning approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 232, 122-129.
  91. Song, Y., & Kapur, M. (2017). How to flip the classroom – “productive failure or traditional flipped classroom” pedagogical design? Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 292- 305.
  92. Stannard, R. (2008). Screen capture software for feedback in language education. [Paper presentation]. The Second International Wireless Ready Symposium, NUCB Graduate School, Nagoya.
  93. Styati, E. W. (2016). Effect of YouTube videos and pictures’ effect on EFL students’ writing performance. Dinamika Ilmu, 16(2), 307-317.
  94. Sugar, W., Brown, A., & Luterbach, K. (2010). Examining the anatomy of a screencast: Uncovering common elements and instructional strategies. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(3), 1-20.
  95. Su Ping, R. L., Verezub, E., Adi Badiozaman, I. F. B., & Chen, W. S. (2020). Tracing EFL students’ flipped classroom journey in a writing class: Lessons from Malaysia. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(3), 305-316.
  96. Szparagowski, R. (2014). The effectiveness of the flipped classroom. Honors Projects,127, 1-31.
  97. Tajallizadeh Khob, M., & Rabi, A. (2014). Meaning-focused audiovisual feedback and EFL writing motivation. Journal of Language and Translation, 4(2), 61-70.
  98. Thompson, R., & Lee, M. J. (2012). Talking with students through screencasting: Experimentations with video feedback to improve student learning. The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, 1.
  99. Tuna, G. (2017). An action study on college students' EFL writing skills development through flipped classroom environments [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
  100. Unakorn, P., & Klongkratoke, U. (2015). Effectiveness of flipped classroom to mathematics learning of grade 11 students [Paper presentation]. The 21st & 22nd   International Conference on Language, Education, and Humanities & Innovation.
  101. Vaezi, R., Afghari, A., & Lotfi, A. (2018). Flipped teaching: Iranian students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Applied Research on Language Teaching, 8(1), 139-154.
  102. Van Heerden, M., Clarence, S., & Bharuthram, S. (2017). What lies beneath: Exploring the deeper purposes of feedback on student writing through considering disciplinary knowledge and knowers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 967-977.
  103. Villanueva, J. (2016). Flipped classroom: An action research [Paper presentation]. The 21st Annual Technology, Colleges and Community Worldwide Online Conference.
  104. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  105. Watcharapunyawong, S., & Usaha, S. (2013). Thai EFL students’ writing errors in different text types: The interference of the first language. English Language Teaching, 6(1),67-78.
  106. Wening, R. H. (2016, June). The role of picture series in improving students’ writing ability [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Education, 739-746.
  107. Wilson, S. G. (2013). The flipped class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduate statistics course. Teaching of Psychology, 40(3), 193-199.
  108. Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect: Self-efficacy and anxiety. System, 39(4), 510-522.
  109. Zheng, M., Chu, C., Wu, Y., & Gou, W. (2018). The mapping of on-line learning to flipped classroom: Small private online course. Sustainability, 10, 1-14.
  110. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59.