Using the Flipped Classroom to Promote Learner Engagement for the Sustainable Development of Language Skills: A Mixed-Methods Study

Abstract

In second language education, the flipped classroom has been widely researched and increasingly applied as a teaching approach to improve the academic performance and engagement of English as a foreign language learners. However, learner engagement is a multidimensional construct, and not much empirical evidence exists about whether the flipped classroom can lead to a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement in the EFL class. To fill this gap, this study adopted a mixed-methods research approach to evaluate the impact of the flipped College English Listening and Speaking class on four-dimension learner engagement in a mainland China context. After an eight-week intervention we compared the experimental group (the flipped class, N = 34) and the control group (the non-flipped class, N = 35). Findings demonstrate that after eight weeks of flipped instruction, students in the flipped class achieved higher mean scores on the post-test engagement questionnaires in behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement. However, the difference in emotional engagement between the flipped and non-flipped classes was not statistically significant. Semi-structured interviews revealed several factors responsible for learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom. Positive influencing factors were learning environment, instructor presence, learning content, and learner presence, whereas negative aspects included the excessive workload on learners, lack of learning preparedness, lengthy videos, and technical challenges. Based on the findings, we would argue that the instructor and other educational stakeholders should provide more support to cater to learners’ emotional engagement and help learners cope with the challenges encountered throughout the flipped learning process. The study may assist teaching professionals and researchers obtain a clearer understanding of flipped instruction in the EFL context and design and implement the flipped class by considering the positive and negative elements affecting learner engagement.

1. Introduction

In the 21st century, the near ubiquity of modern technology means that language teachers can rely on a wide range of technological products to promote the sustainable development of learners’ engagement [1,2]. For example, TV sets, radios, mobile phones, and the Internet have reached almost every household, providing learners easy access to rich learning materials. Against this backdrop, language instructors need to find appropriate technological tools to create a facilitative language environment to initiate and sustain learners’ interests and engagement. It is generally accepted that once learners are engaged in a course, they become active learners, proactively spending time and effort to regulate their behaviours, achieve better performance, and develop higher learning efficacy [1,3,4].

Learner engagement refers to the sustained action and effort learners spend to reach pre-decided goals [5]. Fredricks et al. [6] categorise learner engagement as a behavioural, affective, and cognitive construct, whereas Zhou et al. [7] add social engagement as an essential component in language learning. The bright prospect of applying modern technology to promote learner engagement has stimulated EFL (English as a foreign language) teachers and researchers to look for approaches to transform conventional teaching to create an engaging learning environment. In this background, the flipped classroom has gained popularity, especially after Bergmann and Sams [8] adopted and promoted the flipped approach to help students unable to attend class. The flipped classroom refers to the inversion of traditional classroom procedures by providing in-class contents before class so that instructors can focus on addressing students’ needs during the class [8]. The flipped instruction conforms to language acquisition because it exposes learners to linguistic knowledge before the class and scaffolds learners for interactive-based tasks during the class. It frees up students’ time and is more interactive, flexible, engaging, and dynamic than traditional classrooms because learners taking the flipped class have more opportunities to learn pre-class materials at their own pace and join various interactive-based activities in the class [4,9,10].

Previous research has shown that the flipped classroom can enhance EFL learners’ academic performance in reading, writing, speaking, and listening [3,4,9,10,11]. The research also shows that the flipped classroom can lead to improvement in learners’ perceptions, learning experience, attitudes, motivation, willingness to communicate, and autonomy in the EFL class [11,12]. Nevertheless, studies relating to the flipped class do not always generate positive outcomes, as some researchers have found some negative results of the flipped instruction, such as the extra workload on both teachers and learners, teachers’ pedagogical uncertainty, learners being unable to complete pre-class assignments and shying away from interactive activities during the class, and the inadequate support from educational institutions [9,10]. Bergmann and Sams [8] (p. 102) also warned that almost 10% of students failed in their flipped courses. The inconsistency in the effectiveness of flipped classrooms suggests that flipped classrooms are context-specific and should be studied and implemented with the awareness of the uniqueness of teaching and learning contexts.

In addition, although there has been an increasing number of research aimed at investigating the effects of the flipped classroom in EFL classrooms on academic performance and psychological variables such as motivation, autonomy, and willingness to communicate, research into the impact of the flipped classroom on learners’ engagement in the flipped EFL classroom is relatively limited [3,13,14]. Arguably, there remains a need to gain a more comprehensive and deeper understanding of learner engagement in the language classroom so that teaching professionals can effectively design their classes to improve engagement levels. Furthermore, learner engagement is multidimensional and subject to the influence of the context where learning and teaching are situated, and therefore, merits further explorations.

To address the above issues, this study investigates the effect of the flipped classroom on the behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement of EFL learners who take a college listening and speaking course in the higher education context in mainland China. This study also strives to identify what factors contribute to learner engagement. The findings may help teaching professionals and researchers to gain a better understanding of contextual factors affecting the implementation of a flipped classroom in the situated teaching and learning context. In addition, the findings can shed some light on educational stakeholders in providing adequate support for higher levels of learner engagement in the flipped EFL context.

2. Literature Review

2.1. The Flipped Classroom

The flipped classroom has embraced increased popularity and reputation because of its communicative-based, learner-centred approach to teaching and learning. Its name and definition vary in different contexts. It is termed the inverted classroom, which means “the events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa” [15] (p. 32). The flipped classroom also corresponds to just-in-time teaching, the essence of which is that Web-based pre-instruction assignments, mainly in the form of “warm-up questions” [16] (p. 63), are given to students so that they can think about the questions before arriving at the classroom; inside the classroom, there will be discussions on the questions to elicit and stimulate learners’ interest and promote their critical thinking.

Bishop and Verleger [17] define flipped classrooms as computer-based video lectures carried out outside the classrooms, and interaction-based, group-centred learning taking place in the classroom. Bishop and Verleger maintain that a flipped classroom should include computer-based pre-class individual instructions while excluding test-based materials and other non-video sources. Hung [4] argues that the flipped classroom is an enhanced teaching approach that employs educational technology to improve a student’s learning experience and active learning and that the pre-class assignment comes in various forms, such as self-made and ready-made videos, reading quizzes, and worksheets. As Bond [18] claims, disagreement still exists over the flipped classroom’s exact definition and design principles. In this research, we combined Bishop and Verleger’s and Hung’s definitions of the flipped classroom. In the pre-class assignment materials, we utilised video clips, audio-recordings, worksheets and reading quizzes to prepare learners before class for interactive-based collaborative learning inside the class. We also divided the flipped EFL class into pre-class, during-class, and after-class phases.

2.2. Learner Engagement

2.2.1. The Learner Engagement Definition

Learner engagement occupies a central place in education and has been increasingly studied and discussed in the academic field. Lawson and Lawson [5] maintain engagement should be defined as an action, which refers to the effort learners take to reach pre-decided goals. This view is shared by Skinner et al., who refer to engagement as “energised, directed, and sustained actions” [19] (p. 225). Researchers in language studies, such as Bygate and Samuda [20], define engagement as the efforts and resources learners utilise to achieve language learning objectives. In fact, engagement is challenging to define due to contextual sensitivity, but it is a commonly accepted practice to define engagement by the active, participatory aspect [6,21,22].

To understand engagement, we need to distinguish it from motivation. The two terms are often used intermittently to describe a learner’s involvement in L2 tasks. There are apparent differences, however. Motivation refers to the interest and mental forces that drive one person to take actions in learning, whereas engagement means the actual actions taken [1]. Thus, the difference between motivation and engagement is whether there is an action taken after learners demonstrate an interest in and enthusiasm for learning tasks. In other words, motivation is related to a range of psychological factors that may facilitate engagement, whereas engagement is the manifestation of the multiple psychological factors interacting in the given context. Motivation can be an antecedent for engaged actions [19]. Motivation and engagement are different but inseparable and the two terms can mutually reinforce each other.

2.2.2. The Construct of Learner Engagement

Finn [21] categorises learner engagement as participation and identification. Participation refers to students’ learning behaviours, including whether they observe school rules, respond to teacher instructions, and complete assignments on time. Identification is related to affective engagement, such as whether students have developed a sense of belonging to the learning community and whether they have a positive relationship with the institution and staff. However, Finn’s engagement construct is limited to only the behavioural and affective aspects. Student engagement may go beyond behavioural and affective dimensions and be understood from psychological and social-cultural perspectives [23].

Fredricks et al. [6] provided a more comprehensive categorisation of student engagement, and they divided engagement into behavioural engagement, affective engagement, and cognitive engagement. Behavioural engagement could be observed by studying how students behave in the classroom and at school and whether they are actively involved in learning tasks and school activities. Emotional/affective engagement refers to student emotions such as happiness, sadness, boredom, anxiety, interest, confidence, and enthusiasm displayed in the learning process. Finally, cognitive engagement is defined as students’ mental effort in learning and self-reflection of their learning strategies, which could be observed by analysing students’ reflective learning journals and self-report questionnaires [6].

In addition to behavioural, emotional/affective, and cognitive engagement, social engagement has gained scholarly interest. Advocates of social-cultural theories posit that learners’ behaviour, affect, and cognition come from their interactions in a specific social and cultural context. Social-political factors, the culture in an institution, and the cultural backgrounds of individual learners all impact how students behave and perceive their learning environment. In particular, social engagement can be generated through social interactions with others in the classroom, including learners’ sense of identity, satisfaction, and well-being constructed in interacting with peers, teachers, and other individuals in the academic community [23]. In the language learning environment, social engagement is viewed as a social form of activity and individual involvement in the communities of language acquisition, where communications with interlocutors and the quality of the communications are taken into consideration [24,25]. Hiver et al. maintain that “the social dimension can be distinguished from other forms of engagement when considering that it is explicitly relational in nature and its purpose is interaction with and support of others” [7] (p. 78). Svalberg posits that social engagement is a process and a state. The process refers to learners “initiating and interacting with others” in the language classroom, whereas the state refers to “learners’ behavioural readiness to interact” [26] (p. 246).

In the engagement scale developed by Wang et al. [27] (pp. 592–606), social engagement contains interactions with peers, the instructor, and the broader community. Hiver et al. [28] (pp. 1–12) designed and validified behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement questionnaires in the L2 context, but the authors had not yet constructed social engagement questionnaires. Thus, in this research, social engagement questionnaires were adapted from Wang et al.’s study, and the other three engagement dimensions were adapted from Hiver et al. (see

Table 1. Four-dimension learner engagement and the indicators.

Behavioural engagement	Hiver et al. [28]	Learners’ active participation and involvement in classroom L2 learning.
Emotional engagement	Hiver et al. [28]	Learners’ positive emotional reactions to teachers, peers, and L2 classroom activities.
Cognitive engagement	Hiver et al. [28]	Learners’ level of attention and investment of effort and strategy use in classroom L2 learning.
Social engagement	Wang et al. [27]	Learners’ social interactions and relationships with peers and others in classroom L2 learning.

).

2.3. Learner Engagement in the Flipped EFL Classroom

Several research papers have emerged to investigate how flipped classrooms enhance students’ active learning and engagement in the English language classroom in the context of higher education. For example, the study by Hung [4] reported the positive impact of flipped classrooms on students. Through the experimental design involving both the experimental (flipped classrooms) and control groups (non-flipped classrooms) among university students in Taiwan, he found that participants taught by the flipped model had better English listening and speaking performance and had higher satisfaction with the course, as compared to the non-flipped class. Specifically, the study revealed that the students were engaged with the instructional materials, the format and structure of learning materials, the use of technology, and the freedom of learning at their own pace. However, the study does not specify which aspects of learner engagement have been positively affected, as there is a blurred explanation of what engagement is. Lee and Wallace [14] provided a more comprehensive account of student engagement in flipped EFL classrooms by investigating 39 Korean university students. Through qualitative analysis, the authors discovered that in comparison with the non-flipped classroom, students in the flipped classroom demonstrated three engagement patterns: firstly, students raised more questions in the class; secondly, students invested more time and effort in both the learning process and the tasks; and thirdly, students had understood the content in a better and more profound way. However, the study restricted engagement to indicators such as the questions raised, the time and effort spent, and the course content.

Amiryousefi [3] adopted a mixed-methods study using learning experience questionnaires, tests, and time logs on 69 Iranian college students in traditional and flipped EFL listening and speaking classrooms. Through the control and treatment groups, he found that students in the flipped class showed more engagement with course materials and content. Specifically, it was found that the flipped instruction made the class more enjoyable, and made learners more confident, motivated, and more willing to communicate than those in the non-flipped classroom. Students generally appreciated the meaningful interactions taking place inside the classroom and the increased exposure to English outside the classroom. Nevertheless, the study covers a limited aspect of learner engagement. Norazmi et al. [29] studied the impact of the flipped classroom on three dimensions of engagement in a university in Malaysia. Based on Fredricks et al.’s engagement construct, the questionnaire results showed that flipped classrooms could engage students behaviourally, emotionally, and cognitively in the English for specific purposes course (Technical Writing). In a similar study, Tran and Nguyen [13] deployed questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to understand the behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement in an English for tourism flipped class in Vietnam. The results indicate that students reported a high-level of engagement with flipped classrooms. However, the limitation of the two studies above is the research design: the authors did not introduce the control group, thus we do not know whether it is the flipped classroom that improved learner engagement. Therefore, it is necessary to study the impact of the flipped instruction on learner engagement through rigorous experimental design.

In mainland China, Jiao et al. [30] studied the effect of flipped classrooms on students attending a college English writing course. By comparing the flipped and non-flipped classes, they found that students in the flipped course had higher levels of emotional engagement. Specifically, learners reported less emotional anxiety, more learning interest, and higher confidence levels than those in the traditional classroom. The findings of Jiao et al. were echoed by the experiment results of Huang [31], who discovered that the flipped classroom could reduce the overall anxiety level among EFL learners in mainland China. Although the two studies emphasised the emotional perspective of engagement, other dimensions, such as behavioural and social engagement, remained underexplored. Gao and Zhao [32] studied the effects of flipped classrooms on students taking the English literature course at a university. Comparing the flipped and non-flipped classroom, they found that students taking the flipped classes were more interested in the course and demonstrated more willingness to engage in the pre-class and in-class activities; another finding of this study is that learners’ original interest in studying English, the flipped classroom design, and learners’ familiarity with learning platforms were the significant factors affecting learners’ participation in the classroom. However, one potential issue is that Gao and Zhao’s categorisation of learner engagement is only related to interest (emotion) and participation (behaviour). More dimensions of learner engagement in the EFL context awaits exploration.

Although most studies show positive correlations between flipped classrooms and student engagement, the results are not always consistent. For example, Yang [33] reported that flipped learning added to the learners’ workload; Zhang [34] found that flipped instruction also increased teachers’ workload. In addition, Ekmekci [35] discovered that some students experienced learning anxiety and nervousness due to the interactive nature of flipped learning, whereas Egbert, Herman, and Lee [36] identified that some EFL learners encountered technology and Internet-related problems. The flipped classroom may pose challenges to teachers accustomed to traditional teaching approaches, and transforming the teacher’s role from an instructor to a facilitator would be difficult [8]. Thus, the inconsistency of research findings suggests that the impact of flipped instruction should be studied in different teaching and learning contexts.

The literature review also indicates that in tertiary education, although many studies show positive correlations between flipped classrooms and learner engagement, the studies either give us only a partial picture of learner engagement or lack concrete evidence. Therefore, more research needs to be conducted to understand whether flipped instruction could lead to the sustainable development of learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement in EFL contexts, especially in Chinese tertiary education.

2.4. The F-L-I-PTM Model

Flipped classrooms contain pre-class instructions, in-class interactive activities, and after-class assignments. To further enhance the effectiveness of the flipped classroom and better incorporate the flipped teaching to our teaching context, we draw on the F-L-I-PTM model to guide the flipped classroom design. According to Hung [9] (p. 188), The F-L-I-PTM model in the EFL context is explained in the following ways:

The F principle of a flexible language learning environment: provide comprehensible input with flexibility and accommodate individual preferences and proficiency levels to create acquisition-rich flipped classrooms for L2 learners.

The L principle of a language learning culture: offer interaction opportunities by using active learning strategies to increase learners’ L2 exposure and use in the flipped classroom.

The I principle of intentional linguistic content: design a mechanism with intentional content focusing on target meanings and forms of L2 to connect the pre-class and in-class activities of the flipped classroom.

The P principle of a professional language educator: maintain up-to-date professional knowledge and skills to build a transformative learning community in the flipped classroom that empowers L2 learners to be active and responsible for their own learning [9] (p. 188).

Hung’s model has close relevance to the EFL context, and thus, can guide EFL teachers to design the flipped classroom. In this research, the F-L-I-PTM Model was applied as a framework to guide the design of this College English Listening and Speaking course.

2.5. Research Questions

Based on the reviewed literature above, this research adopts a mixed-methods design to investigate the effect of a flipped EFL listening and speaking class on learners’ engagement and identify the factors affecting their engagement in a Chinese university context. The specific research questions are as follows:

(1)

Does the flipped classroom lead to a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement in the flipped EFL classroom as compared to the non-flipped classroom?

(2)

What factors affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom?

3. Methodology

3.1. The Research Design

Creswell and Plano Clark [37] outline six categories of mixed-methods design according to the level of interaction and timing, and the priority of the quantitative and qualitative strands. This research adopts one type: the sequential explanatory design. The design contains two phases: the quantitative and the followed-up qualitative approach. In this research, we collected and analysed the quantitative data (engagement questionnaires) as a priority to address the first research question, and after that, the qualitative data (semi-structured interviews) were used to verify and compare with the quantitative data, as well as answer the second research question. Thus, the sequential explanatory research design is an effective way to address the two research questions. Apart from obtaining a detailed and fuller picture of a complex problem, Dornyei [38] maintained that mixed-methods research could validate the findings by presenting the research from different angles to achieve the purpose of triangulation.

The quantitative section of the research adopted the experimental design (see Figure 1). Randomly, 69 students were assigned to the control group (N = 35) and the experimental group (N = 34). The study lasted 16 weeks. Both groups received non-flipped, conventional classroom instruction in the first 8 weeks. After that, the experimental group received flipped instruction, whereas the control group continued the non-flipped instruction for another 8 weeks. In both classes, the instructor and the textbook were the same. The teaching objective of both classes was also the same, which was to enable learners to grasp the gist and detail of various listening materials and to use proper vocabulary and correct grammar to express themselves in a communicative environment.

3.2. Research Context and Participants

The research took place in a public university in North China. The university’s Foreign Language Department provides college English courses to first- and second-year non-English major students. This study focused on the College English Listening and Speaking course. In the study, students met weekly for the 90-min, 16-week course in the autumn semester of 2021. A total of 69 participants were enrolled in the College English Listening and Speaking class. None of them had attended the flipped classroom before. Participants had studied English for an average of 14 years. After receiving permission from the department director, 69 participants were randomly assigned to two groups: the control group, which was taught by the non-flipped, conventional approach (N = 35) and the experimental group (N = 34), which was taught by the flipped approach. The flipped class intervention lasted 8 weeks.

3.3. Instruction Procedures

3.3.1. The e-Learning Platform

An e-learning platform called The Cloud Classroom was made available to both students and teachers on mobile phones and computers. The teacher portal has functions such as uploading videos and assignments, marking the submitted homework on the platform, and providing feedback. Students could check the pre-class assignments, complete quizzes, and submit homework through the student portal. The e-platform also generates records about learner attendance, video viewing, and assignment completion.

3.3.2. The Non-Flipped Classroom

In the control group, the class was taught through the conventional non-flipped method. The 90 min was divided into Phase A, Phase B, and Phase C. In Phase A, when the class began, the teacher performed warm-up activities by asking students some questions as the lead-in. Then, the teacher familiarised the students with new words and expressions. After that, the teacher played the video or the tape twice. The listening exercises, such as multiple-choice and blank-filling questions, followed. Meanwhile, the teacher circled the classroom, checking on the answers and providing feedback if students had questions. In Phase B, students watched a new video or listened to the audio recording as an extension of Phase A topics. The listening materials were conversations. After watching or listening to the materials twice, the students worked as a team to prepare for a mini-lecture based on the topics. Then, the teacher selected a couple of students to deliver the mini-lecture in the front of the classroom, after which the instructor gave some feedback. In Phase C, the teacher played a new video for students to complete listening exercises. Standard answers and explanations were then provided. Before the class finished, the teacher assigned homework. The detailed course structure is shown in

Table 2. Instructional process of the flipped and non-flipped classroom.

Non-Flipped Classroom	Flipped Classroom
Before class The instructor does not provide any videos.	Before class Students watch videos about the assignments. Students complete worksheets about the assignments.
During class Phase A: 35 min	During class Phase A: 10 min
The instructor raises some questions about the topic as warm-up activities and then teaches vocabulary. The instructor plays the first video twice and students finish the listening exercise. The instructor answers the questions and elaborates if there are questions from students.	The instructor checks students’ worksheets and provides feedback when necessary. The instructor plays the pre-class videos again and asks students more questions about the video.
Phase B: 45 min The instructor plays a new video twice and writes down the general questions on the blackboard for students to discuss. Students form a group of four to discuss the questions and write down the main points on a piece of paper for a mini-lecture. The instructor selects five groups to share their views in the class.	Phase B: 50 min The instructor plays a new video twice and writes down the general questions on the blackboard for students to discuss. Students form a group of four to discuss the questions and write down the main points on a piece of paper for a mini-lecture. The instructor selects five groups to share their views in the class. The instructor provides feedback.
Phase C: 10 min The instructor plays a new video/audio twice. Students finish blank-filling or multiple-choice questions for a detailed listening exercise. The instructor provides answers.	Phase C: 30 min The instructor plays a new video/audio twice. Students finish blank-filling or multiple-choice questions for a detailed listening exercise. Students work together to compare and discuss answers with each other in the group. The instructor checks on the responses and gives feedback if students have questions.
After class Students review the lesson and complete listening and speaking assignments.	After class Students review the lesson and complete listening and speaking assignments.

.

3.3.3. The Flipped Classroom

The flipped classroom consists of three phases: the pre-class phase, in-class phase, and after-class phase. The classroom design followed the F-L-I-PTM model proposed in Section 2.4. by Hung [9] (p. 188). According to the model, to create a flexible environment in the flipped classroom, the course instructor uploaded pre-class videos and worksheets to engage learners before the class; when preparing the materials, the instructor selected the materials in line with the students’ present English proficiency to ensure that pre-class assignments matched the learners’ proficiency level. The instructor encouraged students to communicate before and after class through the e-learning platform to build a learning culture. The instructor also designed different interactive activities and guided students to collaborate and create a relaxing and friendly environment. In terms of intentional content, the instructor made an effort to establish a close link between pre-class assignments, during-class activities, and after-school assignments. The purpose of the pre-class assignment was designed to scaffold learners by equipping them with linguistic knowledge and skills in advance of in-class interactions. Regarding professional educators, the instructor holds a PhD in language education and possesses many years of teaching experience.

Regarding the flipped instructional procedures, in the pre-class stage, the instructor provided a video to introduce the topic relating to the class. Apart from making videos himself, sometimes the instructor used the listening materials from the textbook and online resources. The students were required to watch the videos at home and worked on the worksheets on the e-learning platform (see Table 2).

In the in-class phase A, the instructor started the class by asking students some general questions regarding the pre-class video to check understanding and then checked their worksheets. Some feedback was provided if there were questions and problems. In Phase B, the instructor played a new video/audio, wrote down the questions on the blackboard, and let students form a group of four to discuss. After the discussion, the instructor asked volunteers to represent their group to deliver a mini-lecture in English. After all representatives finished the presentation, the teacher gave comments and feedback. In Phase C, all the students were required to listen to a news recording twice and complete the listening exercises. Then, they worked together to compare and discuss their answers. The instructor provided sample answers after the teamwork and responded to learners’ inquiries. The final stage was to assign homework that required students to reflect on the day’s learning and complete listening and speaking assignments. Students could post questions on the e-learning platform for discussions and feedback.

3.4. Data Collection and Analysis

3.4.1. Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis

The quantitative data in this research came from participants’ self-report questionnaires administered to the control and experimental groups at the end of the 8th week after both groups received the non-flipped, conventional instructions. The second round of questionnaires was distributed to the control (non-flipped) and experimental (flipped) group at the end of the 16th week, after the experimental group received the flipped instruction while the control group continued with non-flipped instruction. After collecting data from pre-questionnaires and post-questionnaires, the mean of the four engagement scales was calculated and analysed. We used independent sample t-tests to compare the control group (non-flipped) and the experimental group (flipped) before and after the intervention. Meanwhile, we applied paired sample t-tests to compare the results of the flipped group before and after the intervention, as well as the results of the non-flipped class before and after the 8-week traditional teaching. In the questionnaires, the behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement items were adapted from Hiver et al. [28], and the social engagement items were adapted from Wang et al. [27]. The five-point Likert scale questionnaires (see Appendix A) were translated from English to Chinese. Two language education professors were invited to check on questionnaire content and translations for content validity. Then, researchers revised the questionnaires based on the feedback. Before formally administering questionnaires, we performed a piloting study on 15 students from a similar EFL class in the university to ensure the words and items in the questionnaires were clear and did not incur misunderstanding, ambiguity, and discomfort for the participants. Participants were required to rate the items based on their true feelings about the course by circling one of the options, ranging from never true of me (1) to always true of me (5). After formally administering the questionnaires, Cronbach’s alpha of the engagement sub-scales was calculated: behavioural engagement (8 items, a = 0.802), emotional engagement (11 items, a = 0.857), cognitive engagement (8 items, a = 0.844), and social engagement (5 items, a = 0.979). The Cronbach’s alpha results indicate that the reliability of engagement questionnaires is above the acceptable level [39] (p. 774).

3.4.2. Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

Qualitative data came from semi-structured interviews to answer the second research question: “what factors affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom?” In addition, the qualitative data were also used to verify, compare, and contrast with the quantitative data. After quantitative data analysis, six participants were selected using purposeful sampling based on voluntary participation. In the experimental group, three participants with the highest overall score and three with the lowest overall score in the post-questionnaires were chosen. Four were male and two were female. They were referred to as S1–S6 in the study. The reason for this selection was to understand different learners’ experience in the flipped class. Questions such as “what was something specific that you enjoyed about this learning experience?”, “what were some specific concerns or difficulties you had during this learning experience?”, and “did you observe any changes in yourself or others regarding attitudes, behaviours, emotions and relationships with others in the flipped learning?” were asked (see Appendix B for detailed interview questions).

The interview site was the university classroom, which provided a familiar and non-threatening environment where the interviewees could relax and talk more about what they genuinely felt and thought [38]. The interviews were conducted in Chinese, the participants’ L1. The interviews were audio-recorded after gaining permission from the participants, and then the recording was transcribed verbatim. One researcher rendered the transcripts from Chinese into English before the translation was further checked by the other researcher. After translation, we started the coding process following three steps: first, we looked at the data and gained a general understanding of the texts; then, we grouped the data into broader categories; and finally, the categories were integrated into broader themes [38].

4. Findings

This study adopted questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to investigate the effects of the flipped EFL class on learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement through the experiment. Data from semi-structured interviews were also compared with quantitative results. In addition, interview data enabled researchers to explore the factors affecting learners’ engagement in the flipped EFL class. The findings of this study are organised following the research questions.

4.1. RQ1: Does the Flipped Classroom Lead to a Significant Improvement in Learners’ Behavioural, Emotional, Cognitive and Social Engagement Compared to the Non-Flipped Classroom?

Before we started the flipped class treatment process, it was essential to ensure that the experimental and control groups did not have statistically significant differences in behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement. To check whether the difference existed, we administered the first round of engagement questionnaires after the two groups received 8-week non-flipped instructions and before the flipped instruction started. We used an independent sample t-test in SPSS 26.0 to analyse the mean score of each engagement scale (see

Table 3. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class pre-test results.

Engagement	Class	N	Mean	SD	t	p
Behavioural engagement	Flipped	34	3.8218	0.73458
					1.040	0.302
	Non-flipped	35	3.6191	0.87507
Emotional engagement	Flipped	34	3.5218	0.77962
					0.858	0.394
	Non-flipped	35	3.3717	0.67134
Cognitive engagement	Flipped	34	3.3441	0.73448
					0.973	0.334
	Non-flipped	35	3.1586	0.73448
Social engagement	Flipped	34	3.8335	0.87084
					−0.280	0.781
	Non-flipped	35	3.8914	0.84762

p > 0.05.

).

The analysis results showed that the difference in behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement between the flipped and the non-flipped class was 0.302, 0.394, 0.334, and 0.781, respectively (p > 0.05), indicating that there is not a statistically significant difference between the flipped and the non-flipped class in the four engagement dimensions. The results were expected because the participants were randomly assigned into two groups, and all the participants were considered pre-intermediate by the school administration.

The same questionnaires were administered after the 8-week treatment, during which time the flipped model instructed the experimental group while the control group was still taught through the non-flipped approach. After checking normal distribution and homogeneity of the collected data, we applied a paired-sample t-test to compare the flipped class’s pre-test and post-test scores (see

Table 4. Comparison of the flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.

Engagement	Flipped Class	N	Mean	SD	t	p
Behavioural engagement	Pre-test	34	3.8218	0.73458
					5.769	0.000 *
	Post-test	34	4.1168	0.62553
Emotional engagement	Pre-test	34	3.5218	0.77962
					4.641	0.000 *
	Post-test	34	3.6841	0.68345
Cognitive engagement	Pre-test	34	3.3441	0.84745
					6.093	0.000 *
	Post-test	34	3.5941	0.74141
Social engagement	Pre-test	34	3.8335	0.87084
					4.168	0.000 *
	Post-test	34	4.1862	0.53537

* p < 0.05.

); we used an independent sample t-test to compare the post-test results of the flipped and the non-flipped class (see

Table 5. Comparison of the flipped and non-flipped class post-test results.

Engagement	Class	N	Mean	SD	t	p
Behavioural engagement	Flipped	34	4.1168	0.62553
					2.518	0.014 *
	Non-flipped	35	3.6991	0.74524
Emotional engagement	Flipped	34	3.6841	0.68345
					1.673	0.099
	Non-flipped	35	3.4183	0.63593
Cognitive engagement	Flipped	34	3.3441	0.73448
					2.346	0.022 *
	Non-flipped	35	3.1586	0.73448
Social engagement	Flipped	34	3.8335	0.87084
					2.165	0.034 *
	Non-flipped	35	3.8914	0.84762

* p < 0.05.

), and the non-flipped class’s pre-test and post-test scores (see

Table 6. Comparison of the non-flipped class’s pre-test and post-test results.

Engagement	Non-Flipped	N	Mean	SD	t	p
Behavioural engagement	Pre-test	35	3.6191	0.87507
					1.628	0.230
	Post-test	35	3.6991	0.74524
Emotional engagement	Pre-test	35	3.3717	0.67134
					2.030	0.050
	Post-test	35	3.4183	0.63593
Cognitive engagement	Pre-test	35	3.1586	0.73448
					1.558	0.128
	Post-test	35	3.1957	0.66829
Social engagement	Pre-test	35	3.8914	0.84762
					−1.222	0.230
	Post-test	34	3.8400	0.77429

p > 0.05.

).

Comparing the flipped-class pre-tests and post-tests (see Table 4) indicated that the mean score of the post-test questionnaires in all four engagement dimensions was higher than that in the pre-tests, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Specifically, the mean score of behavioural engagement in the post-test (M = 4.1168) was higher than that in the pre-test (M = 3.8218). The mean score of emotional engagement (M = 3.6841), cognitive engagement (M = 3.5941), and social engagement (M = 4.1862) was also higher than that in the pre-test (M = 3.5218, 3.3441, 3.8335, respectively) (p < 0.05). The difference was statistically significant.

Comparing the post-test questionnaires in the flipped and the non-flipped class (see Table 5) revealed that in the flipped class, the mean score of the post-test questionnaires in terms of behavioural engagement (M = 4.1168) was higher than the non-flipped class (M = 3.6991) (p < 0.05). Similarly, in cognitive engagement and social engagement, the mean score of the post-test in the flipped class (M = 3.3441, 3.8335) was significantly higher than that in the non-flipped group (M = 3.1586, 3.8914) (p < 0.05). However, it is noteworthy that in the flipped class, although the mean post-test score in emotional engagement (M = 3.6841) was higher than that in the non-flipped group (M = 3.4183), the difference was not statistically significant.

We also compared the mean score of pre-tests and post-tests (see Table 6) in the non-flipped class. Analysis revealed that the mean score of behavioural, emotional, and cognitive engagement in the post-tests was higher than in the pre-tests. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). We were also surprised to find that the mean score of the post-test questionnaires in the non-flipped class was lower than that in the pre-tests in terms of social engagement.

Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews also support quantitative findings. Participants in the interviews responded that they spent more time and effort when instructed by the flipped model. This is because they had to preview the materials before class for participation in the classroom. For example, S2 commented that if he did not watch the videos beforehand, he would not be able to participate in and contribute to team-based tasks in the class, making him embarrassed. In addition, S5 mentioned he became more emotionally and socially involved in the flipped classroom due to increased opportunities to interact with peers and the instructor inside and outside the classroom. S2 commented: “Talking with my classmates in the classroom made me know them better, and they also provided much support when I met problems in my study”. It is clear that students supporting each other in the learning process in the flipped class helped form a sense of belonging and trust. The immediate feedback from the instructor, as S1 said, helped her to understand language mistakes better, thus improving emotional and cognitive engagement.

Based on the quantitative and qualitative findings, the answer to the first research question is that the flipped EFL classroom can significantly improve learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement. Comparing the flipped and the non-flipped class, we found that learners performed better in all four engagement dimensions. However, it should be noted that the difference in emotional engagement in the post-questionnaires between the flipped and the non-flipped class is not statistically significant.

4.2. RQ2: What Factors Affect Learners’ Engagement in the Flipped EFL Class?

After quantitative data analysis, six participants in the flipped class were selected for the semi-structured interviews based on their overall scores in the second round of engagement questionnaires (S1–S3 were ranked in the top three in terms of total scores, and S4–S6 at the bottom). Interview data analysis generated a number of themes relating to the factors that impact learners’ engagement in the flipped classroom. The themes were categorised into positive and negative factors.

4.2.1. Positive Factors

Interview data show that learning environment, learning culture, instructor presence, and learner presence positively affect learner engagement in the flipped EFL class.

Learning Environment

All of the interview participants appreciated the flexible and interactive learning environment in the flipped classroom. They spoke highly of the flexible learning space created inside and outside the flipped classroom, offline and online. They also preferred interactive and collaborative learning tasks in the flipped context. When asked to provide an example of flexible and interactive-based learning, students responded:

I liked the fact that my English learning was no longer just taking place in the physical classroom. Accessing the videos online increased my exposure to English, and I was fond of learning English on my smartphone. Well, it was so convenient.

(S1)

In the flipped class, the Cloud Classroom (e-learning platform) allowed me to study the materials at my own pace when my time was available, as long as I finished the task before class.

(S3)

Inside the classroom, I was no longer shy about speaking English because my classmates were also using English in the group tasks, and it had become standard practice.

(S5)

I was just a passive listener in the previous (non-flipped) class, and sometimes I fell asleep while the instructor played the listening materials. Now, I found sleep was impossible because I was required to be more active in group discussions and take quizzes and play games in class.

(S6)

The interviews show that the desirability of flipped instruction lies in the fact that learners feel they have more flexibility and choices regarding where and when to learn, which also leads to more exposure to the language. They had more control over their learning. The collaborative and interactive learning environment also lowered their anxiety and nervousness when using English, thus contributing to the increase of learner engagement in the language study.

Instructor Presence

Participants’ responses revealed that although the flipped classroom demands learner autonomy and learner-centeredness, it did not diminish the teacher’s role. Instead, the instructor needed to assume a more critical role as leader, manager, and facilitator. This increased share of responsibility was reflected by the fact that the participants said that they raised more questions in and outside the classroom and needed more help and feedback from the teacher.

When I encountered some problems in group discussions, I usually asked the teacher when she circled.

(S3)

The teacher gave me instant feedback when I did not know how to express myself in English during classroom discussions. He approached me quickly and gave me instructions.

(S1)

I once met a problem in the pre-class stage and couldn’t watch the video. So, I sent a message to the teacher on WeChat, and she instructed me to sort out the problem. I really appreciated her time and effort.

(S4)

The responses from the interviewees demonstrated that in the flipped classroom, students needed more assistance from the teacher and appreciated the instructor’s presence. The flipped classroom had created opportunities for more student-teacher communication and closer rapport. The instructor acted as a leader, manager, and facilitator throughout the flipped learning process.

Learning Content

In the flipped EFL classroom, the instructor needs to provide intentional learning content imparting both meanings and forms of the language. In addition, the pre-class materials are based on learners’ proficiency to carefully scaffold them for interactive-based learning activities during the class [9]. Learning content should come from various resources and appeal to learners. Responses from the participants suggested an affection for the alignment of pre-class assignments and in-class tasks, as well as an appreciation for interesting learning content:

In the non-flipped class, one of the difficulties of speaking English during the class was that I did not know the vocabulary and grammar to construct a single sentence. But the flipped class helped me gain linguistic knowledge before the class to become more competent in group discussions in the class.

(S3)

After watching the videos, I knew what I would learn in the next class, which prepared me for classroom tasks, so I was less nervous than before.

(S5)

The videos provided by the instructor are funnier than the textbook and it made my learning different and interesting.

(S2)

Learner Presence

The flipped classroom is demanding and requires learners to spend more time and energy on pre-class assignments and classroom activities. It also needs learners to become active participants in the learning process and take responsibility for their own learning. Interviews revealed that the interactive nature of the flipped instruction initially posed some challenges for Chinese EFL learners, who were generally perceived as shy and refrained from voicing their opinions in public. However, the learners proved relatively resilient and quickly adapted to the new learning approach after they became familiar with flipped learning under careful support. For example, S5 commented that he previously refused to answer questions in class because he was worried about losing “face” in front of his classmates. However, two weeks later, he gradually adapted to flipped learning after he realised that everybody could not run away from expressing their opinions in the classroom. “If you didn’t respond to the teacher’s question, you would disgrace the whole team”, added S5. In sum, flipped instruction pushed learners to become more active and engaged with their learning.

4.2.2. Negative Factors

Although interviews indicated that the flipped classroom created favourable conditions for learners to engage more with their learning process, some participants expressed their concerns when asked what difficulties or problems they had in the flipped classroom. Data analysis showed that the problems ranged from an excessive workload, a lack of preparedness, lengthy videos, and technical challenges, such as video quality and poor Internet connection.

For example, in the interview, S5 replied: “I need to spend some time to finish watching the videos and completing the worksheet, which added to my study pressure because I had to finish other schoolwork at the same time.” The reply indicates that flipped instruction required students to balance conflicting learning tasks, placed demands on learners’ time management, and added to the workload of learners.

The interview with S6 also revealed that learners need extra time and support to help them adjust to the new learning normal, which might be challenging when learners have become accustomed to doing little preparation before the English class. S6 commented:

Previously, I thought learning English was all about carrying the textbook to the classroom and doing listening exercises. Now, the thing is kind of different because I am required to watch the videos on my own before the class. Frankly speaking, sometimes I couldn’t finish all the pre-class assignments.

S6′s concerns were shared by S4, who admitted that sometimes it was difficult to complete all the pre-class assignments because he was “too busy with other subjects”, “English is simply not my major”, and “I wondered whether it was worth it if I spend too much time on English”. This shows that learners encountered some uncertainty about whether or not they should prioritize flipped EFL assignments over other courses when they were required to commit more time to flipped learning.

The “lengthy videos” were another factor that exacerbated the problem, as S5 responded that some videos, especially those from TED Talks and YouTube, were more than “10 min long” and he had to “spend a lot of time” figuring out what the speakers mean in the lectures. In addition, S3 said that she only had a smartphone with a small screen, making her learning “less engaging” and “more difficult”. She wished to have a computer to access learning materials apart from a smartphone. In the interview, the participant complained that she understood the instructor committed himself to the course, and she appreciated the teacher’s effort. However, she found that in some videos, “the sound is not clear and pictures not sharp,” and sometimes, the Internet did not work, and she would lose her patience with the assignments.

Overall, despite generally positive responses from learners in the flipped instruction, interviews with the participants also exposed several drawbacks. These negative factors ranged from internal factors relating to individual learners to external influences associated with technology and video content. To make the flipped classroom successful, instructors must alleviate or overcome these obstacles in designing, developing, and implementing the flipped instruction.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

This study was carried out in the context of a Chinese university to investigate whether flipped instruction could lead to a significant improvement in learners’ behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement in the College English Listening and Speaking course and what factors affect learners’ engagement in the flipped course.

One central finding was that after the 8-week flipped instruction, students in the flipped classroom had higher behavioural, emotional, and social engagement levels. One possible reason is that the flipped class had created a favourable and facilitative learning environment for students to be involved and participate in the pre- and in-class activities actively [4,13,29]. The substantial increase in interactions between peers and with the instructor in the physical classroom and online environment via the Cloud Classroom led to closer student-teacher rapport and higher learner motivation, which may explain the increased engagement levels, as the interview data suggested that students communicated with the teacher and asked questions in the pre- and during-class phase and became more willing to communicate with peers. Kahu [23] claimed that the change in learners’ engagement in the academic context was subject to the influence of the learning environment co-constructed by learners, the instructor, the university staff, and other contextual elements. Accordingly, the enhancement in learners’ engagement may result from various interconnected factors mutually reinforcing one another, and the flipped classroom may have combined these elements to the advantage of learners. For example, in the interview, one participant said that the flipped classroom had facilitated him to finish the pre- and in-class tasks because he did not want to bring humiliation to the whole team once he failed to participate. In other words, the flipped classroom had fostered a strong sense of belonging and learning in a community where individuals actively relate to each other, resulting in improved engagement in behavioural, emotional, and social dimensions.

Furthermore, in terms of cognitive engagement, the flipped classroom encouraged learners to learn at their own pace by giving them flexibility and freedom to choose when, where, and what to learn. The application of the e-learning platform—the Cloud Classroom—provided an interactive, stimulating, and seamless learning environment, as learners could use the platform to access videos, receive feedback from the lecturer, and familiarize themselves with the course materials in preparation for in-class discussions.

This activated and facilitated the development of learners’ autonomy, problem-solving, decision-making, and critical-thinking skills [3], contributing to the development of cognitive engagement. This finding was congruent with previous studies conducted by Amiryousefi [3], Hung [4], and Lee and Wallace [14]. Their research found that EFL learners had more engagement with course content and class activities, and invested more time and effort in the flipped learning process. However, these researchers primarily focused on the behavioural aspect of engagement and did not provide a detailed and multidimensional account of engagement. The results of the present research, by contrast, emphasised behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and social dimensions, thus contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of learner engagement in the flipped EFL classroom. The findings have pedagogical implications: language professionals in the flipped context could gain more comprehensive knowledge about their learners’ engagement and thus take corresponding measures to promote and sustain engagement from the four dimensions. They need to pay more attention to the engagement dimensions that may be ignored.

Not all the results in this study were positive. One surprising finding of this research was that although the treatment group (the flipped class) had a significant increase in all engagement dimensions in the post-questionnaire compared with the pre-questionnaire results, there was no significant difference in emotional engagement when comparing the flipped and non-flipped post-questionnaire results. One possible reason is that emotional engagement concerns the mental state of learners, such as confidence, anxiety, interest, and enthusiasm, which were affected not only by teaching pedagogies but also by learners’ existing personal characteristics and previous educational and cultural backgrounds [40]. This means that emotional engagement may not experience salient changes by intervention in the short term, say 8 weeks. Another possible explanation is that some learners need time to be mentally ready for this novel teaching approach. Interview data also support this hypothesis. Semi-structured interviews suggested that students’ workload and lack of preparedness were two negative factors affecting learner engagement, which may cause emotional constraints if students in the flipped classroom cannot cope with the difficulties they encounter. Previous research by Hsieh, Wu, and Marek [41] also echoed this discovery. The authors argued that the success of the flipped classroom depended on learners’ preparation and willingness to participate in the activities. This implies that teachers should be aware of learners’ emotional needs in the flipped classroom and pay special attention to their emotional changes. To reduce learners’ workload, teaching professionals and researchers in the future need to investigate learners’ acceptance of pre-class video length in their learning context to make it consistent with learners’ English proficiency. Moreover, instructors must provide guidance, patience, rewards, and care to involve all learners throughout the flipped learning process. Therefore, in future research, it is worthwhile to find appropriate strategies to diffuse learners’ concerns and help them overcome the challenges in flipped learning to optimise learner engagement.

Finally, it should be noted that the flipped EFL classroom in this study was designed by following the F-L-I-PTM model and carried out on the free e-learning platform, the Cloud Classroom, which has a diversity of functions ranging from the discussion board, voice recordings, scores awarded to learners, instant translation, learners’ performance ranking, and gamified learning activities. The easy affordance of the e-learning platform might explain why learners had favourable attitudes towards the flipped learning experience, given that if learners encounter this learning and teaching approach for the first time, they would be naturally attracted to the novelty. In addition, the F-L-I-PTM model, though designed as a guiding principle for the flipped instruction [9], could also help promote the effectiveness of other learning and teaching approaches because the model requires the instructors to have professional knowledge, skills, and conscientious attitudes towards the course and instructional approach. Thus, it can be argued that the flipped instruction, coupled with professional instructors, modern technologies, and relatively cooperative learners, may lead to strong learner engagement and positive learner perceptions. Therefore, the complexity of the flipped classroom should be well noted, and future practitioners and researchers should pay attention to the positive and negative factors when developing and designing their own flipped EFL courses.

Overall, this study expanded existing knowledge about the correlation between the flipped EFL classroom and learner engagement by looking at engagement from multidimensional perspectives. It contributes evidence to the existing literature by proving that the flipped classroom has pedagogical potential to enhance learners’ behavioural, cognitive, and social engagement in a listening and speaking class in the context of a Chinese university. However, we were cautious about the effect of the flipped classroom on the emotional aspect of engagement because no significant difference was discovered between the flipped and the non-flipped class after the 8-week treatment. This implies that more care and effort are needed to cater to learners’ emotional needs in the flipped learning environment and more research is needed to examine emotional engagement. We also found that learners’ lack of preparedness, workload, and technical challenges may hinder the sustainable development of engagement, whereas the flexible learning environment, instructor presence, intentional content, and learner presence could jointly promote learners’ engagement.

For the successful implementation of flipped instruction, it is recommended that teaching professionals and researchers be aware of the contextual complexity of flipped classrooms and consider learner factors and other constraints. In addition, instructors need to develop digital expertise to provide immediate feedback, adequate guidance, and strong support throughout the flipped instruction and to build inter-connectivity between pre-class materials and in-class tasks, based on the F-L-I-PTM model. Moreover, to reduce learners’ workload, sufficient time should be given to learners in the pre-class phase, whereas learning strategies and time-management training should be provided to maximise learners’ time use. Further, implementing successful flipped classrooms requires active and continued administrative support and close cooperation between instructors, school administrators, parents, and other stakeholders to address technical and other problems that may arise in the learning process. Finally, teaching professionals and researchers interested in flipped instruction need to be aware of the complex contextual factors in this study. It is dangerous to assume that flipped teaching will inevitably bring about strong learner engagement and positive learning outcomes in all learning and teaching contexts by simply giving learners some videos to watch in advance. In other words, the flipped classroom success is not only about reversing traditional learning and teaching procedures but about becoming the instructor who attends to learners’ needs and who aspires to use the modern technology for effective classroom learning and teaching.

The study also has some limitations. To begin with, the flipped instruction only lasted 8 weeks, which was not enough to determine the long-term effect on learners’ engagement. It might also explain why there was no significant difference in emotional engagement between the flipped and non-flipped classrooms. Future studies can extend the flipped instruction, say to one year, to look at the long-term impact of the flipped EFL classroom on learner engagement, especially emotional engagement. Moreover, the flipped instruction took place in a listening and speaking class in the context of a Chinese university by studying and comparing around 35 students in two classes. The sample size is small. Thus, the generalizability of the research findings should be performed with caution, and future researchers should be aware of confounding variables such as the instructor’s teaching ability, individual learners’ English proficiency, and learners’ educational and sociocultural backgrounds. Thus, more studies should be conducted in other teaching and learning contexts to verify the flipped classroom’s effectiveness on learner engagement. Finally, this research only applied t-tests to deal with the data. Future researchers can use more robust statistical models, such as mixed-effects models that consider within-participant and within-item variance, to investigate the effects of confounding variables, such as students’ English proficiency levels and teacher training and experience. Despite the limitations aforementioned, the study’s findings could still assist language teachers and researchers to better understand flipped instruction in the EFL classrooms.