The impact of flipped classrooms on student achievement in engineering education: A meta‐analysis of 10 years of research
Abstract
Background: The flipped classroom has become more widely used in engineering education. However, a systematic and quantitative assessment of its achievement outcomes has not been conducted to date. Purpose: To address this gap, we examined the findings from comparative articles published between 2008 and 2017 through a meta‐analysis to summarize the overall effects of the flipped classroom on student achievement in engineering education. Scope/Method: We searched and analyzed journal and conference publications on flipped classroom studies in engineering education in K‐12 and higher education contexts. Twenty‐nine comparative interventions were included in a meta‐analysis involving 2,590 students exposed to flipped classroom and 2,739 students exposed to traditional lectures. A content analysis was also conducted to determine how the flipped engineering classroom benefits student learning. Conclusions: The meta‐analysis comparing these 29 traditional—flipped interventions in relation to student achievement showed an overall significant effect in favor of the flipped classroom over traditional lecturing (Hedges' g = 0.289, 95% CI [0.165, 0.414], p < .001). A moderator analysis showed that the effect of the flipped classroom was further enhanced when instructors offered a brief review at the start of face‐to‐face classes. Our qualitative findings suggest that self‐paced learning and more problem‐solving activities were the two most frequently reported benefits that promoted student learning. Based on quantitative and qualitative support, several implications are identified for future practice, such as offering a brief in‐class review of preclass materials. Some recommendations for future research are also provided.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This result is consistent with Lo & Hew (2019), which found that the combination of individual tasks and small-group activities produced a larger effect size.
“This result is consistent with the study by (Lo & Hew, 2019) which also found that the combination of individual tasks and small-group activities produced a larger effect size.”
From Exploring the Effectiveness of Flipped Classroom on STEM Student Achievement: A Meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Lo & Hew, 2019
This finding is in line with previous meta-analyses showing that formative assessments between pre-class and in-class activities can greatly enhance learning.
“This finding is in line with previous meta-analyses (Hew & Lo, 2018b;Låg & Sæle, 2019;Lo & Hew, 2019;van Alten et al., 2019) showing that formative assessments (e.g., quizzes or reviews) used between pre-class activities and in-class activities can greatly enhance students' learning.”
From Exploring the Effectiveness of Flipped Classroom on STEM Student Achievement: A Meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Lo & Hew, 2019
Cites
Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779 · see citing works
Reprint—Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & and the PRISMA Group (2009) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/89.9.873 · Cited by 2,486 · see citing works
The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review
O'Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002 · Cited by 2,152 · see citing works
First principles of instruction
Merrill, M. D. (2002) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/bf02505024 · Cited by 2,092 · see citing works
<i>meta-analysis</i> bias in location and selection of studies
Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7124.61 · Cited by 1,374 · see citing works
Korpershoek, H., Harms, T., de Boer, H., van Kuijk, M., & Doolaard, S. (2016) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654315626799 · Cited by 633 · see citing works
A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education
Karabulut‐Ilgu, A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N., & Jahren, C. T. (2018) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12548 · Cited by 581 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Adaptive learning: Helpful to the flipped classroom in the online environment of COVID?
Clark, R. M., Kaw, A. K., & Braga Gomes, R. (2022) · Computer Applications in Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/cae.22470 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Exploring the Effectiveness of Flipped Classroom on STEM Student Achievement: A Meta-analysis
Gong, J., Cai, S., & Cheng, M. (2024) · Technology, Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-023-09700-7 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Lo, Chung Kwan
- Venue
- Journal of Engineering Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 523-546
- ISSN
- 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
- 2168-9830
- OpenAlex
- W2981932205
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 43.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Engineering Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee (17610919)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Architecture › Engineering Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- flipped classroom, engineering education, academic performance, traditional lecture comparison, self-paced learning, problem-solving tasks, K-12 engineering education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review