Flipped classroom and critical thinking on public speaking class

Abstract

This study aims to assess the impact of flipped classroom on public speaking performance of students, considering various levels of critical thinking. Additionally, it focuses on analyzing the interaction between flipped classroom, levels of critical thinking, and achievements of students in public speaking. The study adopted a quasi-experiment design, using data obtained from public speaking tests administered to 66 fourth-semester students in the English Language Education Program at a private college in Indonesia. The analysis further used a two-factor ANOVA test to analyze the data collected. The results showed that the use of flipped classroom proved to be an effective instructional strategy for enhancing public speaking skills of the students. Furthermore, a significant observation was observed between flipped classroom and students’ public speaking performance, particularly when considering their levels of critical thinking. In conclusion, flipped classroom method evolves as a viable alternative for teaching public speaking, aiding students in preparing for speech presentations. Recommendations include the development of well-structured lesson plans and the integration of accessible applications in public speaking classes.

Keywords:

• Levels of critical thinking
• flipped classroom
• public speaking

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Colby Tofel-Grehl, School of Teacher Education and Leadership, Utah State University, Logan

SUBJECTS:

• Higher Education
• Study Skills
• Classroom Practice

1. Introduction

The importance of developing students’ speaking ability at higher education levels is highly needed. According to Barwick et al. (2006), Coopman & Lull (2012), Bebee & Bebee (2012), and Ekoç (2021), public speaking in class includes conveying messages before an audience, specifically in English, which is crucial in the globalized world currently. Lecturers actively search for modes to interact with and enhance students in public speaking. Mastering a new language presents challenges that require perseverance, practice, and a commitment of time, money, and resources to contribute to the global promotion of English. Chen & Chew (2021) and Dewi et al. (2016) support the idea that speaking is a communal activity essential for human interaction, knowledge exchange, and building enduring relationships. Previous studies have outlined the struggles of higher education students in improving their public speaking skills. Hung (2017), Kessler et al. (2021), and McNatt (2019) state the importance of effective strategies in speaking particularly the self-motivational aspect. The analysis postulated that effective strategies enhance EFL students’ capabilities and foster automated and responsive training behavior, aiding students in managing their attitudes and feelings toward acquiring knowledge and successful collaboration. The distinction between previous and present studies lies in the moderator variable. Despite earlier studies focused on using effective strategies to enhance communication fluency, the present study explores the interaction between flipped classrooms, students’ public speaking achievements, and their levels of critical thinking skills.

In the dynamic setting of public speaking class, Indonesian students are not merely passive recipients but are actively encouraged to confidently share ideas both within and outside the confines of classroom. The ideal role model fosters an environment that motivates students to be more participative, enabling the pupils to show their knowledge seamlessly. Firmly convinced of the importance of fluency in oral communication before an audience as a tangible indicator of language proficiency, students consider public speaking a crucial skill to nurture and refine. This conviction extends to their assessment of progress, gauging success in completing assignments, and honing abilities through collaborative practice (Fabian, 2019; Montes et al., 2019).

Despite the ideal expectations, students often grapple with challenges. Participants in the study face a deficit in self-assurance, coupled with insufficient preparation and limited exposure to the target language. These obstacles inevitably impact the student’s performance in public speaking class. The Indonesian lecturer is compelled to invest significant effort in addressing these issues, seeking to bridge the gap and empower students for real-world language application. The lecturer assumes a crucial role in guiding students to enhance their public speaking abilities, recognizing the transformative potential of language use in authentic situations. Furthermore, the advancement of technology presents a valuable avenue for students to leverage the language in genuine scenarios. The integration of technology in global education has not only expedited the teaching and learning of English but also fostered collaboration. This correlation with modern pedagogy is evidenced by the transformative impact observed globally (Mafuraga & Moremi, 2017; Rintaningrum, 2023). It is essential for EFL lecturers to fully adopt technological tools in exploring diverse teaching resources and establishing an enriching learning environment (Zhang & Chen, 2022).

To overcome these challenges, the analysis incorporates the implementation of a flipped classroom teaching model that integrates technology into the public speaking class. Recognized as an innovative teaching strategy, the flipped classroom deviates from traditional methods, where instructors deliver content in class and assign homework for completion at home. As cited by Asmara et al. (2019) and Yulian (2021), this method provides increased flexibility and effectiveness, accepting student-centered learning as an evolving paradigm adept at navigating the complexities of EFL contexts, including constraints in time, space, and materials. Building on this foundation, scholars including Arnold-Garza (2014), Nja et al. (2022), and Shaari et al. (2021) assert that flipped classroom pedagogy transforms the traditional class into a recorded lesson accessible before class, prioritizing student application of learning concepts in problem-solving. This shift promotes increased learning exercises, improved self-regulative abilities, and explicit learning methods. The expectation is that by using the model, students become better prepared to grasp materials and engage with assignments. The integration of technology in this model is anticipated to further stimulate critical thinking among students. The flipped classroom, recognized as an innovative classroom teaching model, not only facilitates deep learning (Shi et al., 2023) but also aims to encourage students to explore topics, develop comprehensive understanding, and engage in critical thinking. This underscores the role of the flipped classroom in promoting critical thinking skills among students in public speaking class, offering an alternative teaching model to overcome barriers in 21st-century learning. Etemadfar et al. (2020) show that critical thinking skills require intensive training, and flipped classroom provides a conducive environment for English language learning. With learning material delivered through video recordings, students have more time to enhance their knowledge and develop critical thinking skills, specifically in argumentative speech.

Critical thinking, as embedded in public speaking class, empowers students to method assignments with problem-solving activities. Experts such as Marin & Pava (2017), Ramos (2020), and Hazaymeh & Alomery (2021) reiterate the indispensability of critical thinking for problem-solving, knowledge building, and crafting solutions to complex situations. Mastery of critical thinking becomes a prerequisite for success in public speaking. Educators should tailor instructional pedagogy to include targeted learning activities that cultivate critical thinking skills and enhance students’ resilience to misinformation from varied sources (Demir, 2022; Pang, 2022; ŽivkoviĿ, 2016). The essence of critical thinking includes the ability to make well-informed judgments and decisions through systematic analysis and clarification of facts and evidence, surpassing the mere collection of information. It goes beyond accumulating information, students should substantiate facts, apply knowledge, and carefully analyze. Students enhance the quality of their thinking by adeptly assuming responsibility for organizing their thoughts. Critical thinking transforms classroom design from a model that largely neglects thinking where the skills is pervasive and indispensable. Critical teaching regards content as a dynamic entity within minds, propelled by questions, where textbooks serve not only to transmit information but to be rejuvenated in the minds of students Lunenburg (2011). Furthermore, O’Hare & McGuinness (2012) asserts that the idea of critical thinking raises broader questions about the nature of knowledge and reasoning. Critical thinking includes the application of cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desired outcome. It is a deliberate, reasoned, and goal-oriented type of thinking included in problem-solving, formulating inferences, calculating probabilities, and making decisions, as stated by Halpern (2012).

Previous study predominantly focused on exploring the application of flipped classroom model in grammar, writing, and reading class (Muluk et al., 2022; Shaari et al., 2021; Yulian, 2021). Recognizing the need to address the specific research gap, this analysis aims to analyze the discernible difference in students’ public speaking performance based on their varying levels of critical thinking. There is a dearth of analysis investigating the implementation of flipped classroom in public speaking class within EFL countries, particularly in Indonesia, and this study seeks to fill that void. The expected result is an improved effectiveness of flipped classroom on students’ public speaking achievements, emphasizing their critical thinking levels and fostering proficiency. In this model, students engage with lower-order critical thinking skills at home and subsequently practice higher-order abilities in classroom. Additionally, the study analyzes the effectiveness of the interplay between flipped classroom, levels of critical thinking, and public speaking.

The analysis focuses on exploring the factors influencing students’ performance in public speaking class, reiterating critical nature of effective communication for pupils’ total success, as articulated by Mortaji (2018). The ability to speak in public is identified as a crucial skill for college students, fostering success across various academic disciplines. Public speaking proficiency is recognized as essential to higher education, enhancing students’ capabilities in diverse subjects. To dispel the perception of effective communication as a daunting skill for foreign language learners, educators must generate abundant opportunities for students to practice speaking within and beyond the classroom, leading to tangible improvements. Furthermore, the study presents detailed results under a quasi-experimental design, using t-test samples and analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze study questions. The anticipated results of this study are expected to contribute to the existing body of knowledge, enriching the implementation of flipped classroom in language class. The integration of cognitive skills with the teaching method aims to elevate students’ achievements. In light of these objectives, the study proposed two study questions for consideration.

1. How effective is the use of flipped classroom compared with conventional lectures in teaching public speaking to different levels of critical thinking skills among Indonesian college students?

2. What is the interaction between flipped classroom and levels of critical thinking skills concerning students’ public speaking achievement?

2. Literature review

2.1. Public speaking

Based on the study by Bygate (2010) and Novaković & Teodosijević (2017), speaking evolved as a basic challenge in foreign-language instruction, necessitating students’ active preparation to acquire knowledge and refine their skills. Sequentially delivered, these skills were considered critical instruments for the seamless achievement of both corporate and private interaction objectives. Within classroom context, the ability to speak English proficiently, engage in factual discussions, articulate issues coherently, and speak naturally constitutes captivating topics in speaking class. These objectives were important for participation in Public Speaking class, a subject offered in the fifth semester within the English Department. The course aimed to train students to speak fluently before an audience, with speeches as the instructional materials. The central focus of the class was to improve students’ familiarity and proficiency in public speaking, including various types of speeches. Commencing with a structured exploration of each speech type, class progresses from discussing topics to drafting speeches and finally in public speech delivery. This teaching approach provided students with the abilities to select speech topics, collect pertinent materials, organize their speeches, and engage diverse audiences effectively (Zhang & Ardasheva, 2019).

Building on the perspective of Nikitina (2011), public speaking was regarded as the capacity to deliver speeches before an audience. Barwick et al. (2006) characterized public speaking as direct communication between the presenter and the audience, often associated with commercial activities and businesses. Essentially, effective communication was an interactive activity wherein individuals address an audience to disseminate valuable information, concurrently exercising critical thinking skills. In the context of this study, public speaking was a subject taught in the fourth semester for undergraduate students and the instructional materials included the practice of impromptu, argumentative, and persuasive speeches.

2.2. Critical thinking

Alberta (2010), as cited in Mazur et al. (2015, p. 4), stated that critical thinking centered on student proficiencies rather than mere content and abilities. This method required a paradigm shift in education from information dissemination to inquiry-based learning. Students were expected to possess the ability to acquire, analyze, categorize, unravel complex issues, run information, transform, generate opportunities, apply diverse knowledge, communicate effectively, and showcase a universal and enriching understanding. O'Hare & McGuinness (2012) provided a comprehensive explanation of how to measure critical thinking, serving as crucial references for the present study. Williams & Lahman (2011) elucidated the impact of critical thinking in education, while Pasquinelli et al. (2021) analyzing the ability to accurately regulate self-confidence in presenting a report through a series of evaluation procedures akin to valid information. The study began by reiterating the role of innovation in problem-solving as a crucial aspect of critical thinking variable. This concept correlated with the originality code retained Williams & Lahman (2011). Bandyopadhyay & Szostek (2019) also described multiple measures in critical thinking, asserting that the essential process of thinking assessment should be centered on various practical situations.

In the context of public speaking class, critical thinking played a crucial role in addressing issues. Students were required to critique specific issues, and levels of curiosity among critical thinkers was typically high. Fundamentally, undergraduate students needed to be equipped to contribute to the workforce by addressing issues with innovative methods Sellnow & Ahlfeldt (2005, p.5). It was assumed that with good critical thinking skills, students could better prepare to compete as well as fulfill their rights and responsibilities as citizens. Ennis (1962, 1987) and Facione (1990), as cited in Hitchcock & Hitchcock (2017), provided thorough descriptions of sub-skills and component abilities of critical thinking, including the capacity to clarify values, analyze opinions, evaluate evidence, decide on embedded inferences, and develop justified assumptions.

Students require critical thinking skills to be autonomous and efficacious in the future. Despite sophisticated talents were not hereditary, the students could be developed through structured training. Students needed to consistently cultivate their thinking skills, even when some degree of talent was already inherent. Critical thinking methods empowered individuals to make informed decisions based on thorough, systematic, logical efforts and weighing opposing points of view. These skills, crucial for navigating the challenges of learning a target language (Marashi & Mirghafari, 2019; Wagner, 2019), required deliberate practice for mastery rather than being inherited.

2.3. Flipped classroom

Flipped classroom was globally adopted to varying degrees, with its introduction in 2012 by Berman and Sam in a science class. Subsequently, it found application across various subjects, including music, medical, and language class. In a study conducted by a Turkish scholar Akbel (2018), flipped learning model was implemented in music, differing from the present study that focused on language classroom. Another prior study explored the use of flipped learning model in Economics. Scholars such as Kurihara (2016) and Nguyen & Stracke (2021) previously elaborated on the applicability of flipped classroom, contingent on educators and the number of processes included. The integration of learning in internal and external classroom was seen as a strategic goal in language instruction, leveraging blended teaching to maximize advantages while minimizing drawbacks.

The integration of learning in internal and external classroom was seen as a strategic goal in language instruction, leveraging blended learning to maximize advantages while minimizing drawbacks (Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2022). The shared aspect among earlier and recent studies was the implementation of the flipped classroom at the university level. However, distinctions included the subjects taught, study approaches, methods of data collection, and the promotion of students’ critical thinking.

At the university levels, Fisher et al. (2017) and Lestari (2021) focused on the students’ insights and perceptions regarding the benefits and goals of flipped classroom in terms of learning, commitment, and fulfillment with a technology-enhanced method. The similarities between the previous and present study include dealing with Flipped Learning Classroom Models, digital technology, and student engagement, while the differences comprised the teaching subject, data collection method, and digital learning media. Flipped classroom has become a prevalent instructional method in universities, where blended learning serves as an umbrella for flipped learning (Nja et al., 2022; Shaari et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2018). Survey results showed that flipped classroom successfully combines Internet technology and conventional teaching for undergraduate students. This method was essential for motivating and engaging students, allowing for more flexible learning at home. Endorsing the flipped classroom’s efficacy in higher education, the prior publications focused on reading and writing, while this study adopted the model of speaking.

Examining flipped classroom application in a large higher education class, Danker (2015) and Zainuddin & Attaran (2016) showed the promotion of interactive and enhancement of higher-order thinking skills. This study provided preliminary evidence that flipped classroom foster active learning and develop critical thinking, with differences in population, study subject, and methodology.

Pilot studies conducted by Lam et al. (2022) and Montaner-Villalba (2021) investigated students’ familiarity and perceptions of the technological advancement during flipped classroom instruction in writing class. In this study, flipped classroom was implemented in public speaking class, integrating levels of critical thinking for students.

3. Methods

3.1. Study design

The design used in this study was quasi-experimental, selected with the intention to investigate the impact of the teaching model on students’ achievement. The study aimed to how a significant improvement occurred before and after the treatment through the implementation of flipped classroom. Given the inability to directly intervene in the participants’ class attendance, a quasi-experimental study design was adopted to examine the outcomes. This quasi-experimental design incorporated a 3 x 2 factorial model, with two variables, namely conventional and flipped classroom. These variables were analyzed alongside a moderator variable, namely critical thinking levels. The design details are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Factorial design 3 x 2.

Teaching Model\Public Speaking Critical Thinking levels	Flipped Classroom (FC)	Conventional class (CC)
Public Speaking High Critical Thinking	FC1 – Public Speaking with High Critical Thinking	CC1 – Public Speaking with High Critical Thinking
Public Speaking Medium Critical Thinking	FC2 – Public Speaking with Medium Critical Thinking	CC2 – Public Speaking with medium Critical Thinking
Public Speaking Low Critical Thinking	FC3 – Public Speaking with Low Critical Thinking	CC3 – Public Speaking with Low Critical Thinking

Table 1 describes levels of critical thinking within the experimental group, using flipped classroom, and control group in a conventional class. Therefore, the study aimed to compare both flipped and conventional classroom across different levels of critical thinking in public speaking class. The study also focused on exploring the interaction between flipped classroom and levels of critical thinking skills in students’ public speaking achievements. The hypotheses for this study were as follows

1. No significant difference exists in public speaking competence of students taught using flipped classroom compared to those taught through conventional class.

2. Significant difference is present in public speaking competence of students taught using flipped classroom compared to those taught through conventional class.

3. No interaction exists between flipped classroom and critical thinking concerning public speaking achievement.

4. Interaction exists between flipped classroom and critical thinking concerning public speaking achievement.

Before each class, students watched instructional videos, each lasting no more than 10 minutes, delivered through the flipped classroom method. The content was structured into modules, with 10-minute video segments facilitating the students’ understanding. Upon uploading the videos to Google Classroom, students had easy access to all assignments. These videos included assignment details, rubric explanations, language points, and topics integrated into public speaking class. Students were tasked with watching one or two videos before each of the 28 class meetings held over the 14-week semester. The videos were crafted using a loom and the screencasting app. At home, students formulated questions based on the video content.

Students engaged in listening or watching activities at home, which were then synthesized in the video clips. The expectation was not for students to watch extended periods alone at home, but rather to participate in class discussions where groups read sections of an article and shared their results. At home, students completed various handouts and comprehension questions, including online discussions via platforms such as Telegram group, Flipgrid, and Google Classroom.

Class time was dedicated to a range of activities, including practicing, peer-reviewing, independent learning activities, group discussions, literature circles, projects, and collaborative work, exemplifying inquiry-based learning, a core objective of flipped classroom. Students actively experimented with technology both inside and outside classroom, using blogs, wiki pages, podcasting, Google Docs, Google Drive, and video-making tools. The focus on using these diverse technologies throughout class aimed to make students proficient in their application and fostered comfort in using the tools for educational purposes.

3.2. Participants

The study focused on students at Universitas Galuh, with the sample comprising fourth-semester pupils from the English Department who volunteered to participate. The analysis adopted a convenience sample, naturally forming groups or using volunteers. This method included selecting subjects randomly from a list of the population (a sampling frame), determined by the number of subjects available in classroom. As individuals were not randomly assigned, the procedure falls under the category of a quasi-experiment (Creswell, 2012). The fourth-semester students were further divided into two clusters, namely control and experimental class. The selection of fourth-semester students was carried out through purposive sampling specifically in public speaking course within the English Department curriculum at Universitas Galuh.

3.3. Study instrument

3.3.1. Validity and reliability of public speaking performance test

The validity of the test was established through the adoption of a standardized instrument designed to measure the language performance of EFL students, namely the ‘Public Speaking Competence Rubric’. This rubric, used for assessing the students’ spontaneous talks, correlated moderately with the content covered in public speaking course and closely corresponded to the list of competencies and requirements studied in class (Schreiber & Hartranft, 2017). The test consisted of 11 proficiencies, including Topic Selection, Introduction, Organization, Supporting Material, Conclusion, Word Choice, Vocal Expression, Non-Verbal Behavior, Audience Adaptation, Visual Aids, and Persuasiveness. A five-step competence scale ranging from 0 to 4 was adopted for evaluation. Content validity, specifically for measuring oral test performance in presenting argumentative speech, was determined based on the correlation with the candidates’ language levels. To ensure objectivity and minimize bias, content validity was established through the opinions of experts and statistical methods. Therefore, the inter-raters evaluated both the pre and post-test results to ensure total validity and reliability of the assessment.

3.3.2. Public speaking performance test

The study adopted a standardized test suitable for both pre and post-tests. Before flipped classroom treatment, students participated in a pre-test with speeches delivered in 14 meetings, including individual and small group presentations. The evaluation was based on public Speaking Competence Rubric, as recommended by Schreiber and Hartranft (2017), designed to assess spontaneous speeches. This rubric was found to be entirely consistent with the course textbook, ‘The Art of Public Speaking’ (Lucas, 2011), as cited in Mortaji (2018), and closely adheres to the list of competencies and requirements studied in class. Public Speaking Proficiency Test, derived from the rubric, comprised 11 competencies or dimensions, namely Topic Selection, Introduction, Organization, Supporting Material, Conclusion, Word Choice, Vocal Expression, Non-Verbal Behavior, Audience Adaptation, Visual Aids, and Persuasiveness. Test scores were recorded on a five-step competence scale, with 4 indicating advanced reliability, 3 denoting proficiency, 2 representing basic competence, 1 signifying minimal expertise, and 0 showing deficient efficiency.

3.3.3. Critical Thinking Assessment

The Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric (HCTSR) was applied as a widely recognized international rating tool for evaluating the quality of thinking manifested in verbal presentations or written reports. The HCTSR proved versatile, being applicable in various training or evaluation processes, particularly beneficial when used by trainees to assess the quality of others’ reasoning. This holistic evaluation practice prompted trainees to internalize descriptions of both strong and weak thinking. As mentioned by Hatcher (2013, p. 121), the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment was acknowledged as a reliable and valid measure of critical thinking. These studies expanded the cross-national applications and provided a fresh perspective on traditional validation measures such as academic aptitude and performance.

3.4. Data analysis

The data analysis was conducted using a t-test for two samples assuming equal and two-factor variances (ANOVA) with replication. Microsoft Excel was adopted for statistical analysis, describing the mean of quantitative variable changes based on levels of two categorical factors and testing hypotheses in ANOVA. Prior to hypothesis testing, homogeneity and normality tests were performed in evaluation conditions. The study aimed to provide insights into how a large population perceives issues and the diversity of these perspectives.

For quantitative data analysis, the study applied the Two-Way Analyses of Variance (ANOVA), drawing on Huck’s (2012) theory. This method included three variables, namely flipped classroom as an independent element, levels of critical thinking of the student as the moderator factor, and achievement of public speaking as the dependent component. The quantitative data were analyzed by using a two-way ANOVA which included descriptive and inferential statistics. The descriptive statistical analysis was used to describe the maximum and minimum scores, mean, and standard deviation, while the inferential was applied for hypothesis testing. Homogeneity and normality tests were performed as prerequisites for hypothesis testing.

The two-way ANOVA test analyzed the impact of the teaching model on the student’s achievement in public speaking class. The study applied a t-test for two samples with equal variances, setting an alpha level of 0.05. A p-value below 0.05 indicated a positive interaction among the teaching model, students’ critical thinking levels, and public speaking achievement. Additionally, two-factor with replication ANOVA was implemented to explore the interaction of flipped classroom with levels of critical thinking of students in public speaking class.

4. Result

4.1. Comparing flipped and conventional classroom in teaching public speaking to Indonesian College students with varied levels of critical thinking

Table 2 presents the post-test outcomes of both the conventional lecture and flipped classroom following the implementation of the fresh model in public speaking class. All t-tests were conducted at the alpha level of 0.05. An independent samples t-test was used to assess the mean scores of students’ achievement in the two distinct teaching methods.

Table 2. T-test: two samples assuming equal variances.

	Conventional Lecture	Flipped Classroom
Mean	66,7	89,5
Variance	83,18275862	54,18965517
Observations	30	30
Pooled Variance	68,6862069
Hypothesized Mean Difference	0
df	58
t Stat	−10,65481
P(T< =t) one-tail	0,000000000
t Critical one-tail	1,671552762
P(T< =t) two-tail	0,000000000
t Critical two-tail	2,001717484

Evidence from the t-test (t (58) =10,65481, p < 0,05) showed a significant difference in students’ public speaking achievement between flipped classroom and conventional class. Upon calculation, the mean from flipped classroom exceeded the conventional lecture. The post-test mean in flipped classroom was 89.5, while for the conventional class was 66.7. Therefore, the study concluded that flipped classroom enhanced student achievement in public speaking class. The alternative hypothesis was accepted, signifying a significant difference in students’ public speaking competence before and after being taught using flipped classroom.

4.2. The relationship between flipped classroom, levels of critical thinking, and students’ public speaking achievement

Following the administration of the t-test, the results were computed using the ANOVA two factors with replication. This statistics calculation aimed to assess the variances in teaching models. The ANOVA test included the measurement of three summaries categorized according to low, mid, and high critical thinking levels in both conventional class and flipped classroom as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. ANOVA two factors with replication based on Microsoft Excel Data Analysis.

Summary	High	Med	Low	Total
Flip
Count	10	10	10	30
Sum	983	902	815	2700
Average	98,3	90,2	81,5	90
Variance	4,9	5,73333333	5,16666667	53,5862069
Trad
Count	10	10	10	30
Sum	735	698	568	2001
Average	73,5	69,8	56,8	66,7
Variance	3,16666667	1,95555556	91,9555556	83,1827586
Total
Count	20	20	20
Sum	1718	1600	1383
Average	85,9	80	69,15
Variance	165,673684	113,157895	206,555263

Based on Table 3 the average score for Low-levels critical thinking was 56.8 in conventional class and 81.5 in flipped classroom. For Mid-levels, the average score was 69.8 in conventional class, and flipped classroom had an average score of 90.2. In the high levels, the conventional class scored 73.5, while flipped classroom was 98.3. These scores showed differences between conventional class and flipped classroom based on students’ critical thinking levels. Table 4 presented a summary of scores for both conventional and flipped classroom, with the new model showing higher totals, averages, and variances.

Table 4. ANOVA two factor with replication.

Source of Variation	SS	df	MS	F	P-value	F crit
Sample	8143,35	1	8143,35	432,85845	0,00000	4,01954
Columns	2887,3	2	1443,65	76,73698	0,00000	3,16824
Interaction	63,1	2	31,55	1,67703	0,19651	3,16824
Within	1015,9	54	18,812963
Total	12109,65	59

Table 4 presents the data analysis regarding the interaction between the teaching model and students’ critical thinking skills. This test aimed to assess the P-value and the hypotheses with an alpha level of 0.05. A two-way ANOVA with replication included two hypotheses, addressing the three study questions. The p-values provided answers to these hypotheses, with values greater than 0.05 leading to the acceptance of and values smaller than 0.05 resulting in the rejection of H₀.

The ANOVA test showed a P-value of 0.000, indicating a significant difference between flipped classrooms and students’ achievement in public speaking. Additionally, the P-value for the columns was below 0.05, signifying a significant difference between the teaching model and students’ levels of critical thinking. The interaction P-value was also below 0.05, indicating substantial statistical differences between students’ public speaking achievement and flipped classrooms.

In summary, flipped classroom contributed to higher scores in public speaking class. The teaching model in flipped classroom positively interacted with critical thinking levels in the context of public speaking. The study result showed that the teaching model significantly influenced the students’ critical thinking. Flipped classroom resulted in a significant statistical difference in the experimental group compared to the traditional class model. Therefore, the teaching model impacted critical thinking skills in both flipped and conventional class.

5. Discussion

5.1. Comparing the efficacy of flipped classroom and conventional class in enhancing public speaking skills among Indonesian College students with varying levels of critical thinking

Based on the result, students’ public speaking performance is observed to improve after the treatment using flipped classroom compared to the conventional class model. The results showed that students with high-levels critical thinking perform efficiently in their public speaking class. This correlates with the idea presented by Kassim & Lawani (2015), Pitura (2022), and Wu & Miller (2020), reiterating the importance of managing learning strategies for advanced thinking skills and creativity. Flipped classroom is recognized for promoting critical thinking in language class (Danker, 2015; Qu & Miao, 2021; Yulian, 2021). Additionally, publications such as Ekmekci (2017), Shimkovich et al. (2022), and Webb & Doman (2020) suggest that flipped classroom is more effective than conventional class, with a positive impact on student performance, as observed in this study.

Flipped classroom in this study also used various technology tools such as a screen recorder, Google Classroom, and Flipgrid. The integration of technology offers educators opportunities to enhance students’ performance in public speaking class. Previous predictions by Saed et al. (2021), Egbert et al. (2014), and Alsowat (2016) about the use of electronic technology in learning processes are realized, fostering a pleasurable experience for students and minimizing language learning fears. The majority of flipped classroom applications, as stated by Nja et al. (2022), Shaari et al. (2021), Yang et al. (2018), and Moraros et al. (2015), aim to allow students to access subject-related information at their pace before the actual session, correlating with the principles of blended learning.

Despite the advantages, implementing this model poses challenges such as content selection, formulating questions, addressing technical difficulties, and resource management. The selection of relevant audio content for the lesson plan presents challenges, and instructors should navigate these problems to avoid negative perceptions toward new methods, as argued by Alsowat (2016) and Abd Rahman et al. (2021). Overcoming these challenges requires careful preparation of audio content and encouraging students to actively participate in setting questions related to the material. The study also indicates the initial hesitation of students in question setting, showing the importance of redesigning tasks and incorporating small group discussions to enhance engagement with video content. Previous studies by Brame & Assistant (2012), Roth (2016), and Nguyen & Stracke (2021) states the significance of using class time to enhance understanding and apply knowledge, supporting the applicability of flipped Classroom model in EFL classroom. Educators can shift their focus towards encouraging students to explore language learning independently beyond classroom. This includes recognizing students’ existing capabilities for self-directed learning and devising strategies to further enhance this personalized learning potential within classroom setting. The recommendation by Chua & Lateef (2014) supports the idea that this method is widely accepted among university students in Asia.

5.2. The dynamic interplay of flipped classroom, critical thinking levels, and public speaking achievement

The p-value being lower than 0.05 shows no significant interaction between flipped classroom and students’ critical thinking levels. This correlates with the perspectives of Danker (2015), Hitchcock & Hitchcock (2017), and Asmara et al. (2019), who believed that flipped classroom can promote active learning and enhance critical thinking. The teaching model’s capability to validate the influence of flipped classroom on refining students’ critical thinking is supported by the engagement of analytical processes. Contrarily, Bishop & Verleger (2013) challenge flipped classroom as a buzzword lacking a solid rationale, proposing that it should integrate independent computer learning outside classroom and small-group interaction inside. Herreid & Schiller (2013), Pang (2022), and Chang et al. (2020) state flipped classroom’s flexibility, improvement in learning achievements, and facilitation of creative teaching. Couch (2014) as cited in Lee & Lai (2017, p.2) argues that students’ learning attitudes and academic achievements can be enhanced through flipped classroom.

The primary learning objective has been to advance and enrich students’ critical thinking skills. Critical thinking, viewed as a significant trend in education, transforms classroom design to make thinking pervasive and essential. Analytical teaching views content as alive in minds, driven by questions, and regenerating in the minds of students Lunenburg (2011, p. 2). O’Hare & McGuinness (2012) and Butler et al. (2012) specify critical thinking as purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed thinking included in problem-solving, forming inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions. This teaching method proves applicable for improving students’ achievement in public speaking and is relevant to critical thinking levels, fostering positive engagement in flipped classroom (Marashi & Mirghafari, 2019; Susilo et al., 2021).

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, this study examined how flipped classrooms enhance students’ public speaking performance and explored their interaction with critical thinking levels and public speaking achievement. The results showed a significant difference between students’ public speaking achievement before and after being taught using the model. Envisioned to significantly correlate with students’ public speaking achievement, flipped classroom facilitated enhanced student preparedness before class commenced. The unlimited time to replay recorded lectures elevated students’ progress in critical thinking levels for public speaking performance. It provided a wide range of opportunities for students to explore their learning knowledge, facilitated independent learning, fostered effective interaction, and engaged the pupil in critical thinking skills. A variety of materials were provided for teachers, along with immediate feedback for students. However, there were some challenges, with technology and time management being essential. Flipped classroom proved to be an effective teaching model for university undergraduates.

Innovatively, this study expanded the analysis to explore the interaction between flipped classroom and levels of critical thinking skills in public speaking class. The result showed a positive interaction among flipped classroom, critical thinking levels, and students’ public speaking achievement. This teaching model enhanced students’ critical thinking in public speaking performance, specifically in enhancing 11 competencies for public speaking argumentative speech. Pedagogically, flipped classroom promoted new teaching strategies relying on technology and allocating more time for learning outside classroom. However, some distractions occurred, potentially disengaging students, such as issues with accessing the video link and internet connection. To address this, the teacher downloaded learning sources for students to watch offline. Another technical challenge comprised video-related issues, including resolutions, volume, and delivery rate. No immediate solutions were found in the first month, the teacher improved the video selection for subsequent months. The final challenge was related to resources, as sessions in a flipped classroom were recorded by instructors. In this study, lectures used videos from the internet, requiring the teacher to carefully consider the appropriateness of the clip for educational outcomes and plan accordingly before presenting them to the students.

Implications stemming from the results suggested that English lecturers should offer increased motivation to students to enhance their understanding of materials and deliver effective speeches. Additionally, educators need to actively support students in developing high-levels critical thinking skills, encouraging greater participation in classroom. Students with low-levels critical thinking skills should be stimulated to enhance self-identification and offered additional exposure to materials to bolster their self-reliance in academic matters. Considering the interaction between the teaching model and students’ critical thinking levels in public speaking, the analysis advocates for implications and suggestions for public speaking class lecturer.

In light of these implications, the study suggested some recommendations for further study. Lecturers are advised to prepare appropriate video content correlating with lesson plans in flipped classroom public speaking class. Given the reliance on technology in flipped classroom, lecturers should create easily accessible applications for students to use at home. Future study endeavors could benefit from increasing participants in language class to yield more comprehensive results regarding the interaction among flipped classroom, language skills, and other cognitive skills. Additionally, lecturers are encouraged to record videos with clear resolutions tailored to lesson plans.

Addressing the limitations of this recent study, it was acknowledged that the adoption of only two classes in a university and the exclusive use of critical thinking aspects as the moderator variable. Further study should expand samples, considering various aspects influencing teaching and learning English as a foreign language.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The authors have no funding to report.

Notes on contributors

Leni Irianti

The study focused on the advancement of flipped classroom in English language class, particularly in public speaking class. It differed from previous studies by integrating flipped classroom with levels of critical thinking. Moreover, it was anticipated that more language class would adopt flipped classroom as an alternative teaching and learning process for acquiring English.

Leni Irianti, a doctorate candidate in the English education program at Universitas Negeri Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia, and a lecturer at Universitas Galuh, teaches speaking for academics, public speaking, and ELT Media and Technology. The responsibilities in this study included writing original drafts, revising, and editing.

Abdurrachman Faridi

Abdurrachman Faridi, a professor in the English education program at the Faculty of Language and Arts Universitas Negeri Semarang, Central Java Indonesia, is concerned about the literature of this study.

Hendi Pratama

Hendi Pratama, an English lecturer in the English education program at the Faculty of Language and Arts Universitas Negeri Semarang, Central Java Indonesia, is tasked with reviewing the study methodology.

Suwandi

Suwandi, a professor in the English education program at Universitas PGRI Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia, with study interests in English language teaching, was concerned about the layout of the results of this study.