The Effects of Flipped Teaching and Retrieval Practice in a Graduate Level Physiology Course

Abstract

Retrieval practice is a deliberate recalling exercise that has been shown to enhance student learning and engagement. Yet another teaching method, the flipped classroom (FC), is gaining interest as it allows active learning instead of traditional lecture‐based teaching (TT). These three teaching methods were compared in a graduate‐level physiology course for Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) students over four semesters using exam grades. The TT method involved classroom lectures during the entire class period with periodic quizzes and group activities over the lecture content. In the FC method, the lecture content was shifted outside of the classroom for students to review on their own prior to be engaged in active learning activities during class time. An online individual assessment was assigned to ensure student participation in completing the review of lecture content. The in‐class time was used for mini‐lectures for the clarification of content and team‐based learning activities (TBL), where the students could use resources to solve problems. Subsequently, FC was combined with retrieval practice (FCR). In the FCR teaching method, students were still given study materials to review prior to scheduled class meeting. However, the individual assessment was shifted to be completed during class where students were not allowed to use any of the resources, in order to enhance retrieval exercise. Similarly, the TBL assessment was completed in class without the use of any study materials. The FCR teaching method resulted in higher exam scores (M = 91.13, SD = 0.089) than the TT method (M = 89.57, SD = 0.549). Thus, students learning seems to be more enhanced with the use of the FCR teaching method than the TT or the FC methods. Also, when the exam scores were divided into the upper and lower half of the class, the upper half benefited more than the lower half in both the FC and FCR methods. On the other hand, when male and female students were compared between the three teaching methods, there was no statistical difference. Typically, CRNA students are highly motivated and maintain a very high class average (89.57% in the TT method). Thus, any further increment will require a major shift, such as the FCR teaching approach. The upper half of the class demonstrating significantly higher scores in both the FC and FCR teaching methods suggests that they utilize pre‐class content more efficiently in their preparation for their in‐class activities compared to the lower half of the class. Overall, in conclusion, FTR appears to be the best among the three teaching methods, TT, FC, and FCR studied.