Journal of Language Horizons

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Executive staff

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Journal Metrics

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Guide for Authors

Ethics Commitment Form

Conflict of Interest

Publons Registration Guide

The Reviewer of the Journal in 2020

List of 2021 Reviewer

Reviewers 2022

The Effect of Flipped Learning on English Writing Performance and Self-Efficacy of Iranian Medical Students

Document Type : Research article

Authors

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

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Appendix A

The Analytic Rubric (Jacobs et al., 1981)

Category 

Score

Criteria

 

 

CONTENT

25-21

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

20-16

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

15-11

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

10-0

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

 

 

ORGANIZATION

25-21

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

20-16

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

15-11

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

10-0

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

 

 

LANGUAGE USE

25-21

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

20-16

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

15-11

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

10-0

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

 

 

VOCABULARY

15-13

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

12-10

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

9-7

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

6-0

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

 

 

MECHANICS

10

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

9-8

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

7-6

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

5-0

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

 

 

References
  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. https://doi.org/10.32861/ellr.59.164.172
  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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
  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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1301958
  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. https://doi.org/10.31185/eduj.Vol2.Iss39.1426
  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. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n4p28
  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. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n4p67
  7. Allen, K., & Marquez, A. (2011). Teaching vocabulary with visual aids. Journal of Kao Ying Industrial & Commercial Vocational High School, 1(9), 1-5. http://210.60.110.11/reading/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/10022007.pdf
  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. www.fedu.uaeu.ac.ae/journal/docs/pdf/pdf29/2_E.pdf
  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. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12353
  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. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20150304.18
  13. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
  14. Bandura, A. (1986a). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1449722
  15. Bandura, A. (1986b). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359
  16. Bartlett, A. (1994). The implications of whole language for classroom management. Action in Teacher Education, 16, 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1994.10463189
  17. Basal, A. (2015). The implementation of a flipped classroom in foreign language teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Education-TOJCE, 16(4), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.72185
  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. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/nera-2017
  20. Brame, C. (2013). Flipping the classroom. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/flipping-the-classroom/.
  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. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255585177
  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. http://www.iadis.org
  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. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/ctlle
  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. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
  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. http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-3846
  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. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.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. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27537168
  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. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256446014
  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. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i02.7816
  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.  https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/4793/
  34. Eshet, Y. (2007). Teaching online: Survival skills for the effective teacher. Inroads- The SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(2), 16-20. https://doi.org/10.1145/1272848.1272862
  35. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350
  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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.006
  38. Funk, G. D., & Funk, H. D. (1989). Roadblocks to implementing the writing process. Clearing House, 62, 222-224. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30196919
  39. Gaumer Erickson, A., & Noonan, P. (2016). College and career competency (CCC) framework needs assessment. University of Kansas, Center for Research on Learning. http://resources.cccframework.org
  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. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n6p53
  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. https://flippedlearning.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/07/WhitePaper_FlippedLearning.pdf
  43. Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1878
  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. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.5n.2p.97
  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. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n3p101
  46. Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.967701
  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. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553228400100210
  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.
  51.  https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0073641
  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. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1496627
  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. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?
  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. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v6-i4/3463
  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. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.5n.4p.29
  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. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.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. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/29544/
  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. http://repository.uinjkt.ac.id/dspace/bitstream/123456789/30171/3/ROSYAKURNIATI-FITK.pdf
  59. Lane, J., & Lane, A. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior and Personality, 29(7), 687-694. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.7.687
  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. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2004.32.3.247
  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. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.115116.02lee
  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. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2015100103
  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 https://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/handle/1/1790
  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. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v2n2p86
  67. McCarthy, P., Meier, S., & Rinderer, R. (1985). Self-efficacy and writing. College Composition and Communication, 36(4), 465-471. https://doi.org/10.2307/357865
  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. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01173038
  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. https://doi.org/10.5539/eltv12n5p101
  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. http://lccn.loc.gov/2015044657
  72. O’Malley, P. J. (2011). Combining screen casting and a tablet PC to deliver personalized student feedback. New Directions, 7, 27-30. https://doi.org/10.29311/ndtps.v0i7.464
  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 https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.425632
  74. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543
  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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6807(199604)33:2<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. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1997.10544593
  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. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0995
  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.          https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/8w32r8160
  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. http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP
  82. Ruffini, M. F. (2012). Screencasting to engage learning. Educause Review Online. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/screencasting-engage-learning
  83. Samiee Zafarghandi, M. (2018). The effect of flip learning on students' self-Efficacy and academic achievement. Anthropology of Education eJournal. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3154001
  84. Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(34), 207-231. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com
  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. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/200172none.pdf
  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.http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj15(IPLL)11/2.pdf
  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. https://doi.org/ 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.1.91
  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. http://www.mojet.net
  90. Soliman, N. A. (2016). Teaching English for academic purposes via the flipped learning approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 232, 122-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.036
  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. http://www.ifets.info
  92. Stannard, R. (2008). Screen capture software for feedback in language education. [Paper presentation]. The Second International Wireless Ready Symposium, NUCB Graduate School, Nagoya.  https://curve.coventry.ac.uk
  93. Styati, E. W. (2016). Effect of YouTube videos and pictures’ effect on EFL students’ writing performance. Dinamika Ilmu, 16(2), 307-317. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v16i2.534
  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. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i3.851
  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.https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1574597
  96. Szparagowski, R. (2014). The effectiveness of the flipped classroom. Honors Projects,127, 1-31. https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/honorsprojects/127
  97. Tajallizadeh Khob, M., & Rabi, A. (2014). Meaning-focused audiovisual feedback and EFL writing motivation. Journal of Language and Translation, 4(2), 61-70. https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=513515
  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. https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/category/issues/issue-one/
  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. http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12621730/index.pdf
    https://hdl.handle.net/11511/27053
  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. https://icsai.org/procarch/1iclehi/1iclehi-44.pdf
  101. Vaezi, R., Afghari, A., & Lotfi, A. (2018). Flipped teaching: Iranian students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Applied Research on Language Teaching, 8(1), 139-154. https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2019.114131.1382
  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. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1212985
  103. Villanueva, J. (2016). Flipped classroom: An action research [Paper presentation]. The 21st Annual Technology, Colleges and Community Worldwide Online Conference. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/40822
  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. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n1p67
  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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628313487461
  108. Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect: Self-efficacy and anxiety. System, 39(4), 510-522. http://www.elsevier.com
  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. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030748
  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. https://doi.org/10.1037/00220663.82.1.51
Journal of Language Horizons
Volume 6, Issue 1 - Serial Number 11
May 2022
Pages 161-182
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics