Translate this page into:
Evaluating the efficacy of flipped classroom teaching– learning method compared to traditional classroom method in teaching homoeopathic materia medica to third BHMS students: A quasi-experimental self-control study
, Bhavik Ramesh Parekh2, Ashwin Shrikant Kulkarni3, Akshata Damodar Nayak2, Bipin Sohanraj Jain2, Shubhangi Sukumar Magdum1
*Corresponding author: Dr. Dhanashree Ashwin Kulkarni, Department of Homoeopathic Materia Medica, Late Mrs. Housabai Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India. bhalerao_dhanashree@yahoo.in
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Kulkarni DA, Parekh BR, Kulkarni AS, Nayak AD, Jain BS, Magdum SS. Evaluating the efficacy of flipped classroom teaching–learning method compared to traditional classroom method in teaching homoeopathic materia medica to third BHMS students: A quasi-experimental self-control study. J Integr Stand Homoeopath. 2025;8:127-34. doi: 10.25259/JISH_48_2025
Abstract
Objectives:
Conventionally, homoeopathic materia medica is taught to undergraduates (UG) through the lecture or traditional classroom (TC) method. The TC method faces limitations such as limited time and attention spans, one-sided lectures, passive learning and limited scope of interaction. We therefore aimed to use the flipped classroom (FC) strategy and observe its benefits while teaching a content-heavy subject like materia medica.
Material and Methods:
This was a quasi-experimental self-controlled study conducted for III BHMS students at a UG college in Maharashtra. Four lectures were conducted; two using the TC method, followed by two using the FC method. Pre- and post-test assessments were conducted after the 2nd and 4th lectures. After all 4 lectures were completed, a feedback form comprising the quantitative and descriptive aspects of both methods was provided to the students for recording their overall experience.
Results:
The difference between the pre- and post-test scores was statistically significant in both groups. The students’ feedback forms showed a preference for FC. Amongst the students, 60% found FC excellent for learning, more engaging, interesting and enjoyable and encouraged deeper thinking, understanding and connections. Further, 53% could connect to the shared information in an FC and 54% could resolve their doubts. After FC, 68% students were definitely confident about applying the learning in the clinical setting and examination; 76% were definitely satisfied with the FC.
Conclusion:
TC likely enables better recall-based outcomes, as seen through better performance in multiple-choice tests, whereas FC had better outcomes in long-answer tests, possibly because it focused on differentiation between remedies, which requires higher cognition such as analysis, evaluation and qualitative appreciation.
Keywords
Competency-based dynamic curriculum
Critical thinking
Innovative teaching–learning method
Student engagement
Undergraduate homoeopathic education
INTRODUCTION
Materia medica is a subject in homoeopathy that deals with indications of the remedies used in clinical practice. Usually, subjects are taught through the lecture method; lectures typically last 60 min. Each remedy is allotted a specific number of lectures, ranging from 1 to 3. Each drug has to be understood from various perspectives, including symptomatology, toxicological data, tissue affinities, clinical utility and remedy relationships, according to the blueprint provided by the national commission of homoeopathy in the competency-based dynamic curriculum.[1] As materia medica is quite information-heavy, it can be challenging for teachers as well as students.
In contrast to pedagogical methods, which are teacher-centred, andragogy focuses on the students’ needs and experiences.[2] However, a majority of current undergraduate (UG) homoeopathic education is still pedagogical. A traditional lecture has the inherent drawback of being one-way communication; this commands a limited attention span, leads to a lack of interest and affords limited scope for interaction and doubt solving. Most often, students have to learn the remedies by rote; this makes the subject dry.
Thus, innovative methods of teaching–learning for improving student engagement and outcomes are required. One such method is using the principles of adult learning, as in a flipped classroom (FC). An FC is a blended learning method wherein students are given preparatory work in the form of assignments, reference readings or pre-recorded lectures at home. The classroom time is used for deeper discussions on the topic under the teacher’s guidance, where the focus is to identify and resolve misconceptions and foster problem-solving skills. Thus, in FC, the matter dealt with in class and homework is interchanged.[3,4]
The traditional classroom (TC) method may not allow the best use of the time allotted to each topic.[5] Lectures facilitate lower-order thinking skills, i.e., remembering and understanding the topic, while FC promotes higher-order thinking skills (analysing-evaluating-creating). These are relevant where students can benefit from exploring these skills with their peers and tutor.[6] This experience reflects in students’ performance at the examinations and eventually the application of the relevant concepts.
A meta-analysis[7] has shown that FC improves student learning in health professionals and allows more active time for discussion. Another study, conducted in a postgraduate homoeopathic institution, found that FC improves classroom engagement and develops critical thinking and problem-solving skills in students.[8] FC facilitates critical thinking and allows time for student–teacher interaction, active feedback and application of the studied material.[9] FC boosts students’ confidence in the material, improves their performance and enables a positive perception of learning.[4]
This study was conducted to explore the use of FC as an innovative learning strategy and observe its benefits while teaching materia medica to III BHMS students.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Study design
A quasi-experimental self-controlled study.
Study setting
A UG college in Maharashtra.
Study duration
The study was conducted over 4 lectures from July 25th, 2024, to August 26th, 2024.
Study population
The study involved students doing III BHMS. This group is in a transition phase from basic, foundational subjects to more complex subjects. Since students are introduced to clinical subjects in III BHMS, this is an ideal time to introduce them to integrated learning and application of theory in practice.
Sample size
All 100 students from the III BHMS batch were included in the study.
Eligibility criteria
Students of IIIrd BHMS,
Age 18–25 years
Both sexes
Provided consent to participate in the study.
Exclusion criteria
None.
Withdrawal criteria
Students who have missed 1 or more lectures.
Students who have not submitted the assignments.
Methodology
Intervention
An orientation regarding the study was conducted at the outset and voluntary consent was obtained. The study was conducted over 4 lectures. Two sets of comparable remedies (a total of 4 remedies) were selected for the study. The first two lectures followed the TC method, where the instructor used a PowerPoint presentation to conduct the lecture in the traditional method. The topic for the lecture was announced 1 week prior.
The FC session topics were announced 1 week before the lecture as well. A structured assignment was given to the students; they were asked to submit assignments 2 days prior. The sessions began with sharing by the students regarding the topic, followed by step-wise discussion of the subtopics. The last 10 min were dedicated to summarising the learnings of the session.
The methodology has been summarised in the flow chart in Figure 1.
- Methodology flow chart. LAQ: Long answer question
Outcome assessment
The efficacy of FC as a teaching–learning method was compared to that of the TC method by comparing the results of the pre-tests and post-tests comprising 10 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) scoring 1 mark, administered before and after each lecture. The pre-test and post-test scores were used to assess the knowledge at the baseline after the intervention, respectively. These were done for lectures on both methods.
A formative assessment was conducted using a long-answer question (LAQ) scoring 10 marks. The students compared the two remedies taught in the first and second lectures (TC method) and the third and fourth lectures (FC method) to test their analysis and higher cognition abilities.
Both the above scores generated quantitative data, which were further used to calculate descriptive and inferential statistics.
At the end of all 4 lectures, a feedback form was provided to all students to record the overall comparative experience of both methods. This form had 2 parts. The first part assessed the overall experience of both methods on a Likert scale. The second part comprised open-ended questions evaluating the overall FC experience.
The comprehensiveness and relevance of the MCQs, LAQs, assignments for FC, presentations for all 4 lectures and the feedback form used in the study were validated by the following experts: The head of the homoeopathic materia medica department and associate professors from 2 institutions.
Statistical methods (data analysis)
Marks for the pre-test, post-test and LAQ scores were entered into an Excel sheet using a coding system and thoroughly verified for any entry errors. Statistical analysis was conducted using the statistical package for the social sciences software version 26.0, IBM. The data were provided using frequencies and percentages (categorical data) and mean and standard deviation (numerical data).
Normality of the numerical data was checked using the Shapiro–Wilk test. The data did not follow a standard curve; therefore, non-parametric tests were used for comparisons.
Inter-group comparison was performed using the Mann–Whitney U test
Intra-group comparison was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (up to 2 observations).
For all the statistical tests, P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant, keeping a error at 5% and b error at 20%, thus giving an 80% power to the study.
RESULTS
Amongst the 100 enrolled students, 21, 7, 24 and 12 were absent for the first, second, third and fourth lectures, respectively. Students who missed even 1 lecture were excluded from the study. The feedback form of every student who attended at least one session of TC and FC was considered. Amongst the 100 students included, 87 filled out the feedback form; all 87 were analysed to capture the subjective experience.
Analysis of pre- and post-test scores and LAQ marks
TC comparison of pre- and post-test values of lecture 1 (L1) and lecture 2 (L2)
Table 1 implies P < 0.01. There was a statistically significant difference between the pre- and post-test scores (P < 0.01) for both the lectures in TC, with higher post-test values.
| Timeline | Mean | Standard deviation | Median | Mean diff | Standard deviation of diff | Z value | P-value of Wilcoxon signed-rank test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-test L1 | 7.24 | 1.589 | 8 | −1.870 | 1.542 | −5.681 | 0.000** |
| Post-test L1 | 9.11 | 1.003 | 9 | ||||
| Pre-test L2 | 6.70 | 1.877 | 7 | −2.786 | 1.786 | −6.416 | 0.000** |
| Post-test L2 | 9.48 | 0.809 | 10 |
Wilcoxon signed-rank test;**indicates statistically highly significant P<0.01
FC: Comparison of pre- and post-test values of L1 and L2
Table 2 shows a statistically significant difference between the pre- and post-test scores (P < 0.01) for both the lectures in FC, with higher post-test values.
| Timeline | Mean | Standard deviation | Median | Mean diff | Standard deviation of diff | Z value | P-value of Wilcoxon signed-rank test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-test L1 | 6.68 | 1.917 | 7 | −2.214 | 1.826 | −5.806 | 0.000** |
| Post-test L1 | 8.89 | 1.155 | 9 | ||||
| Pre-test L2 | 6.91 | 2.083 | 7.5 | −1.714 | 1.979 | −5.123 | 0.000** |
| Post-test L2 | 8.63 | 0.906 | 9 |
Wilcoxon signed-rank test; **indicates statistically highly significant P<0.01.
Inter group pair-wise comparison of TC and FC for pre-test L1, post-test L1, pre-test L2 and post-test L2 using the Mann–Whitney U test
Table 3 compares the pre- and post-test scores between the TC and FC. The difference between the pre-test values of the TC and FC was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.01) in the post-test scores for the second lecture between the TC and FC, with higher values in TC.
| Timeline | Group | N | Mean | Standard deviation | Mean rank | Sum of ranks | Median | Mann–Whitney U value | Z value | P-value of Mann–Whitney U test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-test L1 | 1 | 56 | 7.27 | 1.567 | 61.38 | 3437.5 | 8 | 1294.500 | −1.622 | 0.105# |
| 2 | 56 | 6.68 | 1.917 | 51.62 | 2890.5 | 7 | ||||
| Post-test L1 | 1 | 56 | 9.11 | 1.003 | 58.31 | 3148.5 | 9 | 1360.500 | −0.958 | 0.338# |
| 2 | 56 | 8.89 | 1.155 | 52.79 | 2956.5 | 9 | ||||
| Pre-test L2 | 1 | 56 | 6.70 | 1.877 | 53.89 | 3018 | 7 | 1422.000 | −0.864 | 0.388# |
| 2 | 56 | 6.91 | 2.083 | 59.11 | 3310 | 7.5 | ||||
| Post-test L2 | 1 | 56 | 9.48 | 0.809 | 72.05 | 4035 | 10 | 697.000 | −5.388 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 56 | 8.63 | 0.906 | 40.95 | 2293 | 9 |
Mann–Whitney U test; **indicates statistically highly significant P<0.01; #indicates statistically non-significant P>0.05
Table 4 shows a statistically significant difference between the LAQ scores for TC and FC (P < 0.01), with higher values in FC.
| Category | Group | n | Mean | Standard deviation | Standard error mean | Mean diff | 95% confidence interval of the difference lower | 95% confidence interval of the difference upper | T value | P-value of t-test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAQ | TC | 56 | 3.70 | 1.377 | 0.184 | −1.027 | −1.561 | −0.493 | −3.809 | 0.000** |
| FC | 56 | 4.72 | 1.474 | 0.197 |
LAQ: Long answer question, TC: Traditional classroom, FC: Flipped classroom. Independent t-test; ** indicates statistically highly significant P<0.01
Feedback form
All 87 students responded to the open-ended questions in the feedback form.
Table 5 compares the feedback between the TC and FC. The students’ feedback forms evaluated their subjective experience of both methods on a Likert Scale. There was a significantly higher (P < 0.01) preference for FC. All the questions for FC showed significantly higher values for the same, indicating a student preference for FC over TC.
| Question No. | Group | n | Mean | Standard deviation | Mean rank | Sum of ranks | Median | Mann–Whitney U value | Z value | P-value of Mann–Whitney U test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 1 | 87 | 0.72 | 0.726 | 58.14 | 5058.00 | 1.000 | 1230.000 | −8.283 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.69 | 0.490 | 116.86 | 10167.00 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q2 | 1 | 87 | 0.51 | 0.847 | 56.33 | 4900.50 | 1.000 | 1072.500 | −8.678 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.67 | 0.543 | 118.67 | 10324.50 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q3 | 1 | 87 | 0.61 | 0.969 | 57.70 | 5020.00 | 1.000 | 1192.000 | −8.409 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.75 | 0.437 | 117.30 | 10205.00 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q4 | 1 | 87 | 0.59 | 0.947 | 58.58 | 5096.50 | 1.000 | 1268.500 | −8.135 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.69 | 0.513 | 116.42 | 10128.50 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q5 | 1 | 87 | 0.55 | 1.020 | 66.71 | 5803.50 | 0.000 | 1975.500 | −5.757 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.43 | 0.844 | 108.29 | 9421.50 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q6 | 1 | 87 | 0.64 | 1.000 | 66.85 | 5816.00 | 1.000 | 1988.000 | −5.739 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.47 | 0.790 | 108.15 | 9409.00 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q7 | 1 | 87 | 0.86 | 0.824 | 61.99 | 5393.00 | 1.000 | 1565.000 | −7.301 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.72 | 0.584 | 113.01 | 9832.00 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q8 | 1 | 87 | 0.57 | 1.063 | 56.48 | 4914.00 | 1.000 | 1086.000 | −8.978 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.86 | 0.436 | 118.52 | 10311.00 | 2.000 | ||||
| Q9 | 1 | 87 | 0.59 | 1.063 | 56.75 | 4937.50 | 1.000 | 1109.500 | −8.859 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 1.85 | 0.418 | 118.25 | 10287.50 | 2.000 | ||||
| Total | 1 | 87 | 5.64 | 6.421 | 51.72 | 4500.00 | 6.000 | 672.000 | −9.395 | 0.000** |
| 2 | 87 | 15.13 | 3.540 | 123.28 | 10725.00 | 16.000 |
Some of the opinions expressed by students are given below: P 09-‘In Flipped Classroom lectures, there is much excitement about solving the assignments and study the drug pictures in a comparative manner. In traditional lectures, Teacher’s participation is predominant. But in Flipped classroom there is an enhancement in the communication and interaction between the students and teachers because of which the lectures are more interesting and overall it is a good experience.’
P 34-‘Pre Intimation of the topic is what I liked the most. The Assignment gave directions regarding what needs to be kept in mind while reading the topic and writing answers. It increased my interest to read before the lecture. I was not reading the reference like a novel as directions were available. The discussion is class is appreciated. Because of the discussion, my overall interest in Homoeopathic Materia Medica has increased; which I otherwise find it difficult.’
P 56-‘Lots of referencing needs to be done’
P 63-‘Due to the assignment we already came across the symptoms of the remedy, and we were able to give a thought to the remedy. The process of thinking brought out queries regarding the same. The thought process improved. Doubts got cleared during the lecture. Eg.: In Petroleum gastralgia> eating was confusing but was neatly explained in the lecture. Intensity of cracks in petroleum was explained in the lecture.’
P70-‘Flipped classroom format helped us to refer and read more books for solving the assignment. Because of this we can co-relate the information given by different authors and learning becomes more fruitful. In flipped classroom method we are able to get more information about the clinical conditions and co relate them with the other symptoms.’
P 72-‘Assignments made me read and refer different books than those that we usually use. Assignments kept me engaged in that particular topic and my interest to learn more about what I had understood increased. Learning, reciting and writing about what I had learnt saved it in my memory for a longer time which the assignments did.’
P 81- ‘Pre reading and Assignments made the Flipped Classroom more impactful and had better participation and engagement.’
P 94-‘In traditional classroom we were just passive listeners and we were not aware about the topic and came to class without any preparation. But during Flipped Classroom format we actively took part in the lectures due to assignments that made us aware of our doubts before the lecture so we could ask them during the lecture.’
This feedback suggests enhanced student–teacher interactions, improved student engagement with study material in the form of referencing, involvement of students in their learning process, better doubt solving in lectures, impactful discussions and better retention of content as some of the benefits that are evident from the above statements.
DISCUSSION
The study evaluates the impact of the FC method in teaching–learning homoeopathic materia medica in III BHMS students.
Pre- and post-test MCQs scores
An analysis of the post-test MCQ scores of both groups shows a statistically significant change in the post-test scores of both groups after both TC and FC. This suggests that both the methods can improve student performance at the level of memory and recall. However, in one of the lectures, the student performance in post-test MCQs was observed to be statistically significantly higher in TC than in FC. This could be because MCQs as a method were better to test lower cognitive aspects, such as memory and recall, in which TC scores over FC. The TC lectures are an effective mode for transmitting facts in a structured format.[10,11] The FC method is also known to improve academic performance through active learning and promoting critical thinking.[4]
LAQ scores
The LAQ scores showed statistically better results in FC over TC. The LAQ focused on the differentiation between the remedies; therefore, it required higher cognitive skills of analysis, evaluation and qualitative comparison, all of which the students could grasp and apply.
Feedback form
The overall student feedback, however, suggests a preference for the FC method over the TC method (P < 0.01 preference for FC). These findings are consistent with the findings of the other studies that have evaluated student satisfaction in an FC model.[4,8,12-14]
Better engagement
Amongst the students in the study, 61% opined that learning through FC was excellent and engaging as compared to TC.
The pre-classroom engagement with learning material, difficulties and doubts faced while referencing, actively involving the students in the learning process and discussion during lectures kept the class engaged throughout the lecture. In the TC method, the concentration is divided between taking notes and listening to the lecture.
Enjoyable experience
Amongst the students, 65% strongly agreed that the lecture was conducted using the FC method; in comparison, only 39% reported it to be an enjoyable experience in TC.
Deeper thinking, understanding and connections
Amongst the students, 61% strongly agreed that FC encouraged deeper thinking, understanding and connections rather than mere sharing of information. In comparison, 53% of students felt that they could connect to information shared in the lecture with their own experience in FC, while 34% could only sometimes relate to the information shared in a TC. The assignment allowed for increased referencing and reading of material, which is usually not done. The FC allowed more time for discussion of the practical application of the remedy as well as clinical utility and integration.
Doubt resolution
Amongst the students, 54% felt that they could resolve their doubts in an FC compared to only 31% in TC. The assignments allowed the students to engage with the reading material and come up with doubts, which were cleared during the discussion.
Confidence about applying the concepts
After attending the FC session, 68% students were definitely confident about applying the learning gained through the lecture in the clinical setting as well as in the examination, with much less students feeling so in TC.
Overall satisfaction
Amongst the students, 78% responded that they will always look forward to this type of learning in the future, while 76% were definitely satisfied with the FC. Better student engagement, discussions establishing the relevance of the topic (covering the practical application and utility) and better resolution of doubts, all these factors have contributed to the overall satisfaction with this method.
The overall data regarding academic performance after an FC or TC across various streams and subjects of medicine, abroad and in India, are variable. Some studies[3,10,15] noted a better performance after FC, while others have not found a statistically significant difference between the performance of the FC and TC methods.[7,13] In contrast, some studies found better academic results with the TC method.[16] Studies suggest that in a set-up where most lectures are conducted using a TC method, students may take time to adjust to the new method and may even feel overwhelmed with the set material for self-study and the referencing required to solve the FC assignment.[14,17]
The effectiveness of the FC relies on how well students have prepared the material and completed the assignment, as this affects their performance.[7,4] In FC, active learning in the form of student preparation is an important aspect. Successful implementation of an FC requires a shift in the students’ mindset, so that they are more aware of their responsibility in the process of learning.[4]
Although TCs are less interactive, they effectively convey information and improve knowledge retention in specific contexts. Lectures are particularly effective for transmitting factual knowledge and providing straightforward, structured content. A PowerPoint presentation supplemented the lectures in the study. A study suggests that students retained 15% more data when a lecture was conducted using a PowerPoint presentation (graphics + alphanumeric information).[18]
All these factors likely contributed to the study outcomes. It is possible that the students were excited about participating in a research project during the initial TC lectures, and the excitement and motivation reduced over time. This could be an extraneous variable influencing the outcomes. Due to this, although the students were not supposed to prepare before the TC, many students studied the remedy on their own, which could have an impact on the result.
Another possible factor affecting the result was the reactive effect due to the pre-test. In TC, the students became aware of the questions and focused on the PowerPoint presentation to search for answers to the questions in the pre-test. The pre-test and post-test were designed to cover what was taught. The PowerPoint presentation was confirmed to cover all the questions. In the FC, the flow of the session was not structured and was primarily determined by the discussion. The focus was on discussion, solving the students’ doubts, and determining what they understood from the assignment. There was a lot of lateral thinking and limited coverage of facts, which probably led to the better scores in LAQ of the FC.
Limitations of this study
It was conducted only on the students of IIIrd BHMS of one institute.
This was a 1st-time exposure of a novel method of teaching–learning for the students and only 2 sessions were conducted using the FC method. Students take time to acclimatise to a new method of teaching; this may have affected the outcome of the study.
MCQs have limitations in assessing higher cognitive domains and may not be an ideal tool for testing the outcomes of FC.
Objective parameters of students’ engagement with the assignment could have provided a better idea of the outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Both TC and FC have the ability to improve students’ performance, as evidenced by the post-test MCQs. The TC method showed a slightly better performance when assessed with MCQs. In comparison, the FC method showed better performance in the LAQs, which aimed to differentiate the remedies taught. Differentiation needs a higher level of cognition, analysis and evaluation, which was found to be possible through the FC method. At the same time, the subjective experience of learning amongst students was found to be significantly better in FC. This is evident through the feedback form, which showed an inclination towards the FC method. This suggests a valid agreement for adopting the FC method for teaching materia medica. The method can be slightly modified, where some time is allotted for classroom activities and an equal time is allotted for teaching. It also suggests that TC method may still be relevant in UG education to deliver factual information, which is important for the students to memorise and recall in the examinations. Thus, the study indicates that a mixed teaching–learning method of FC and TC can be effective in teaching UG students which can improve student engagement as well as examination grades.
Ethical approval:
The research/study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Late Mrs. Housabai Homoeopathic Medical College, Nimshirgaon, number HHMC/IEC/OW/2024/09, dated April 22, 2024.
Declaration of patient consent:
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.
Conflicts of interest:
There are no conflicts of interest
Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:
The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.
Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.
References
- Available from: https://nch.org.in [Last accessed on 2025 Apr 01]
- An Investigation into the philosophical differences between pedagogical and andragogical approaches to education. J Educ Rev Provision. 2023;3:38-46.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Flipped learning in TESOL: Definitions, approaches, and implementation. TESOL J. 2016;7:429-37.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- The application of flipped classroom strategies in medical education: A review and recommendations. Med Sci Educ. 2024;35:531-40.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Available from: https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/flipped-classrooms [Last accessed on 2025 Nov 17]
- An analysis of the flipped classroom based on the bloom's taxonomy of the educational objectives In: Advances in social science, education and humanities research. Conference: 2021 4th international conference on humanities education and social sciences (ICHESS 2021). 2022.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- A meta-analysis of outcomes comparing flipped classroom and lecture. Am J Pharm Educ. 2018;82:6898.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Implementing integrated curriculum in advanced teaching in the fundamentals of homoeopathy utilising flipped classroom, case-based learning, and group discussion: Post-graduate homoeopathic education. J Integr Stand Homoeopathy. 2023;6:102-7.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Flipped learning: Facilitating student engagement through repeated instruction and direct feedback. Cogent Educ. 2024;11:2412500.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- On the use and misuse of lectures in higher education. Health Prof Educ. 2015;1:12-8.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Effectiveness of flipped classroom as a teaching-learning method among undergraduate medical students-An interventional study. J Educ Health Promot. 2019;8:211.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Perception of MBBS students to “Flipped class room” approach in neuroanatomy module. Anat Cell Biol. 2015;48:138-43.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The FLIPPED STEP study: A randomized controlled trial of flipped vs. traditional classroom teaching in a university-level statistics and epidemiology course. Int J Educ Res Open. 2022;3:100197.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Assessing the effectiveness of flipped classroom teaching-learning method among undergraduate medical students at gondar university, college of medicine and health sciences: An interventional study. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24:1108.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Flipped classroom versus traditional didactic classroom in medical teaching: A comparative study. Cureus. 2022;14:e23657.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Flipped classroom for undergraduate medical students in India: Are we ready for it? Adv Physiol Educ. 2023;47:694-8.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015;14:ar5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Information retention from PowerPoint™ and traditional lectures. Comput Educ. 2009;52:858-67.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]