Effects of inverted L2/Ln language pedagogy on student experiences and outcomes: The case of American Sign Language
Abstract
Second language (L2) learning has largely occurred in the traditional lecture-based classroom setting. Studies show that the lecture format has an impact on student outcomes and perceptions of classroom learning. Negative impacts include insufficient time for reinforcement activities, reviewing lecture materials, and engaging in conversation between instructors and students. An innovative way to enhance L2 students’ classroom outcomes and perceptions is the inverted classroom pedagogy. This study assesses whether the inverted pedagogy leads to more positive student perspectives and higher student outcomes compared to traditional pedagogy in L2 classrooms in American Sign Language (ASL). In this study, student outcomes and instructor and student perceptions of inverted pedagogy for ASL are assessed using a mixed method design with one controlled (traditional) and one experimental (inverted) advanced ASL class in a post-secondary setting. Results suggest that the inverted pedagogy is an approach that is as viable as the traditional approach for teaching and learning ASL as an L2 that enables students to engage in meaningful activities and conversations.
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?
A recent study comparing inverted and traditional ASL classrooms found comparable performance outcomes, although students in the inverted model reported more opportunities for practice, interaction, and conversational skill building.
“One recent study comparing inverted and traditional ASL classrooms found comparable performance outcomes, although students in the inverted model reported more opportunities for practice, interaction, and conversational skill building [42].”
From ASL Educators' Perspectives on AI for Enhancing Student Learning in American Sign Language Education (2026) · cites this paper as [42]
Cites
Group Work, Interlanguage Talk, and Second Language Acquisition
Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586827 · Cited by 901 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…able to use language for a variety of purposes (e.g. asking each other for clarification), with a variety of people, and had the opportunity to receive and incorporate feedback in a variety of contexts (Davis, 1997; Freeman & Freeman, 1994; Long & Porter, 1985). a L2 studies in inverted pedagogy.”
The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren't Enough
Swain, M. (1993) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.50.1.158 · Cited by 731 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Swain (1993) suggested different ways in which linguistic output may aid the learning of language.”
"Information Gap" Tasks: Do They Facilitate Second Language Acquisition?
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586546 · Cited by 498 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The landscape of American Sign Language education
Pirone, J. S., Pudans‐Smith, K. K., Ivy, T., & Listman, J. D. (2023) · Foreign Language Annals · doi:10.1111/flan.12679 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
ASL Educators' Perspectives on AI for Enhancing Student Learning in American Sign Language Education
Hassan, S., Nourian, L., de Lacerda Pataca, C., M Olson, M., D'aurio, T., Agarwal, K., Asad, S. M. N., Tigwell, G. W., & Huenerfauth, M. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791928 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cripps, J. H., Rosen, R. S., Cooper, S. B., Fenicle, R., & Sever-Hall, A.
- Affiliations
- Clemson University (US)
- City University of New York (US)
- Towson University (US)
- Howard County Public School System (US)
- St. Catherine University, USA
- Corresponding author
- Cripps, Jody H.
- Venue
- Language Teaching Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2021-10-05
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2082-2110
- ISSN
- 1362-1688 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0954
- OpenAlex
- W3201771392
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4
- FWCI
- 2.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Teaching Research (publishedVersion)
- SOPHIA (St. Catherine University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Hearing Impairment and Communication
- Keywords
- flipped classroom, American Sign Language, second language teaching, lecture method, student perceptions, student outcomes, sign language education, postsecondary 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