Context-based learning in flipped middle school chemistry class

ABSTRACT

The study implements and investigates an innovative learning approach that incorporates Flipped Classroom (FC) methodologies and electronic assessment (e-assessment) in Context-Based Learning (CBL) in chemistry among middle school students. The study incorporated mixed methods strategies and (a) examined learners’ attitudes toward and perceptions of CBL in a hybrid environment in learning chemistry by using a structured, open-ended questionnaire; (b) examined learners’ awareness of the relevance of chemistry concepts and content to real-life and real-world situations by using a learning diary to examine activities initiated by the learners themselves; and (c) examined the correlation between learners’ achievements on online tasks and their achievements on a final written test. The findings revealed the students’ positive attitudes toward CBL in a hybrid environment using FC strategy. In addition, learning chemistry in a context-based approach helped learners see that the curriculum is relevant to phenomena that they encounter in real life and the real world. Furthermore, a strong correlation emerged between the learners’ achievements on the online assignments and their achievements on a conventional written test. This study adds knowledge about attitudes toward a context-based FC approach with e-assessments among middle school students, a population that has been the topic of very little exploration.

KEYWORDS:

• Context-based learning
• flipped classroom
• student attitudes and achievements

Introduction

The flipped classroom (FC) is a hybrid teaching method wherein pre-recorded online videos deliver the teaching content, while face-to-face instruction is focused on discussion, questions, exercises, and teacher-student interactions in the classroom (Assi & Cohen, 2018; Bishop & Verleger, 2013). Electronic assessment (e-assessment), which is defined as the use of electronic technology and tools to design and manage assessments (Ferrell & Gray, 2013), can support the FC strategy by providing immediate feedback to the students (Whitelock, 2006) that is readily available and unrestricted in time (Henderson, 2016; Noguera et al., 2019), place, and resources, thereby giving teachers more time to devote to exercises. In addition, pre-class e-assessment may be useful to ensure that students have viewed the videos (Lo & Hew, 2017).

A context-based approach to teaching chemistry places practical chemistry applications and their connections to real-world situations at the center of the teaching. Therein, students learn chemistry concepts based on their ‘need-to-know’ in order to understand real-world phenomena (King, 2012). The research literature cites many advantages of context-based learning (CBL) in the sciences. For example, CBL can enhance students’ level of interest and enjoyment (e.g. Avargil et al., 2012) and their understanding of the curriculum (e.g. Wannagatesiri et al., 2017); and raise their awareness of the relevance of educational content to real life and the real world (e.g. King & Henderson, 2018; Parchmann et al., 2006; Stolk et al., 2016; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017).

In view thereof, this exploratory and case-based study has two main goals: The first goal is to implement and investigate an innovative CBL approach to teaching chemistry among middle school students that incorporates FC methodology and e-assessment. The second goal is to examine and characterise student activities initiated by the learners themselves and that were not assigned by their teacher (termed ‘informal activities’), and student achievements. To achieve these goals, the study (a) employed a structured open-ended questionnaire to assess learners’ attitudes toward and perceptions of the CBL FC approach to learning chemistry; (b) examined learners’ level of awareness of CBL (based on Cohen & Ezra, 2018; Ezra & Cohen, 2018), by using a learning diary to examine informal activities that assist in technology; (c) examined learners’ performance and achievement in online assessment tasks, as well as the correlation between these and their achievements on a final written test. Notably, this study constituted a comprehensive investigation of the flipped classroom approach in conjunction with context-based learning, albeit without a control group.

The research described in this paper can add to the existing body of knowledge about learners’ attitudes toward context-based FC approaches and e-assessments. In so doing, it also addresses the issue of students’ experience with various forms of e-assessment (Bahar & Asil, 2018; Stodberg, 2012). As to date most studies examining CBL use in the sciences have been conducted among students in high school and above (e.g. King & Henderson, 2018), this study has the potential to narrow the theoretical gap regarding the use of CBL in middle school science instruction by providing a qualitative analysis of the students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward this approach. Moreover, from a practical perspective, given the teacher’s prominent role in selecting the instructional approach, promoting the adoption of the context-based approach among middle school teachers is essential. This research can aid in developing online CBL curricula that will serve teachers. In addition, it can contribute to the professional development of teachers who use CBL (Stolk et al., 2016).

Literature review

Flipped classroom method and e-assessments

FC methodology is an instructional strategy that facilitates hybrid learning incorporating both face-to-face and distance learning (Horn & Staker, 2011). According to Bishop and Verleger (2013), this strategy rearranges the traditional teaching environment by delivering instructional content via online videos, while face-to-face learning takes place in small groups. As the literature has already demonstrated, FC methodology has many advantages, among them the flexibility of time and place (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Henderson, 2016; Herreid & Schiller, 2013); development of learner responsibility (Sletten, 2017) consequent to its student-centered approach (Chen, 2016; Gilboy et al., 2015); and higher performance and achievements than with traditional instruction (Assi & Cohen, 2018; Maciejewski, 2016; Peterson, 2016). Because the FC model rests on small group learning, it also promotes student engagement in learning processes and increases student-student and teacher-tudent interaction (Chen, 2016; Clark, 2015). Yet FC methodology also has difficulties and challenges: Teachers have difficulty finding good and suitable videos, either online or self-recorded (Chen, 2016; Herreid & Schiller, 2013). Another challenge that teachers face in applying flipped classroom in K-12 is ensuring that students have actually watched the video (Chen, 2016; Herreid & Schiller, 2013). To overcome the latter, follow-up quizzes (pre-class quizzes) were given to ensure that students had previewed the learning materials (Lo & Hew, 2017).

As aforementioned, not only does technology support teaching and learning, it also helps with assessment. While e-assessment is defined as the use of electronic technology and tools to design and manage assessments (Ferrell & Gray, 2013), recent advances in instructional technologies and assessment design have necessitated adopting a new perspective on assessment (Shute et al., 2016). The literature shows that learners view e-assessments as convenient (e.g. Noguera et al., 2019) and as facilitating higher achievements (e.g. Babo & Suhonen, 2018; Henderson, 2016; Sánchez-Cabrero et al., 2021). Moreover, a positive correlation was found between the extent of e-assessment use and final scores (e.g. Massing et al., 2018). Over time, online assessment scores changed significantly and were found to correlate positively with gains on state test scores (Karpinski et al., 2019). In addition, a strong correlation emerged between the extent to which students were engaged in FC and e-assessments and their performance and test grades (Henderson, 2016). Students also expressed greater satisfaction with e-assessments (e.g. Bahati et al., 2019) than they did with conventional assessments, and spent more time studying when they were offered the option of e-assessment (Massing et al., 2018). Other students reported reasonable satisfaction with e-assessment tools, but at the same time stated that they preferred ‘pen and paper’ exams (Patronis et al., 2019). In addition to students’ preference for ‘pen-and-paper’ exams over e-assessments, research has also found that innovative practices in e-assessment have resulted in a sense of privacy invasion among participants (Noguera et al., 2019). Thus, researchers cite the need to understand how students experience diverse forms of e-assessment (Bahar & Asil, 2018; Stodberg, 2012). Although many studies have been conducted on FC and e-assessments, few combine these two aspects into a tool used to support learning in the FC setting. Henderson’s (2016) study is one of the few that examined this combination.

Context-Based learning in science education

In recent decades, one of the main goals of science education has been to develop scientific literacy and high-level thinking among students (NRC, 1996). Literacy in chemistry is defined as the ability to understand the structure and to use chemistry knowledge to solve daily life issues (Shwartz et al., 2006). These goals can be achieved through CBL approaches (Gilbert, 2006) wherein students learn scientific concepts and processes by analysing everyday problems. Context-based approaches have already been adopted in science, such that scientific contexts and applications can serve as a starting point for developing scientific ideas (Bennett et al., 2007), versus conventional approaches wherein students are first taught scientific ideas and only thereafter learn to apply them (Schriebl et al., 2023; Solomon & Aikenhead, 1994). In the context-based approach to teaching chemistry, the teaching focuses on chemistry and its connections to real-world situations, and chemistry concepts are taught on a ‘need-to-know’ basis in situations wherein students need these concepts to understand real-world phenomena (King, 2012). Judging what is ‘real-world’ depends upon the subjective view of the instructor or science education researcher (Herrington et al., 2003), or in other words, whoever is creating, evaluating, or investigating the learning opportunity. This subjective view is influenced by that person’s experience, culture, demographics, education, emotions, and so forth.

The advantages of CBL in learning science manifest in both affective and cognitive domains: CBL contributes to learners’ level of interest and enjoyment (e.g. Avargil et al., 2012; Broman et al., 2020; King, 2012; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017); enhances students’ understanding of the content (e.g. Gilbert et al., 2011; Ulum et al., 2019; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017); raises students’ awareness of the relevance of real-life and real-world content (e.g. Bennett & Lubben, 2003; Broman et al., 2020; King & Henderson, 2018; Parchmann et al., 2006; Stolk et al., 2016; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017); and improves levels of literacy in (e.g. Wiyarsi et al., 2020) and engagement (e.g. Broman et al., 2020) with chemistry. Moreover, van Vorst and Aydogmus (2021) found that students who have better grades or are more interested in chemistry tend to choose unusual context-based tasks, while those with lower grades or less interest in chemistry tend to choose everyday context-based tasks.

While many studies have investigated the use of CBL in science among high school and higher education students, very few have examined it among middle schoolers (e.g. King & Henderson, 2018).

Research goals and questions

The purpose of this study was to implement and investigate an innovative CBL approach to teaching chemistry to middle school students that incorporates Flipped Classroom (FC) methodologies and online assessment. In addition, the study sought to examine and characterise the students’ informal activities as well as achievements. To achieve these goals, we posed the following questions:

1. What are students’ attitudes toward CBL in a hybrid environment for learning chemistry? How do students perceive the CBL approach?

2. In addition to the dedicated activities assigned by the teacher, do the students initiate technology-assisted, chemistry-related informal activities? If so, how can these activities be characterised?

3. What correlation is there, if any, between student achievements on online assessment tasks and their achievements on the final written test?

Methodology

In this study, a new hybrid instructional intervention was designed for 7th-grade class using FC strategy. The curriculum covered topics related to the material world: energy, temperature, and state of matter. These issues are part of the mandatory curriculum of the 7th-grade class, taught during the second third of the year. The students’ prior knowledge from the first third of the 7th-grade curriculum is: ‘The particle model of mater’, which means that the matter is composed of particles without differentiation between atoms, molecules, etc. The study employed mixed methods, incorporating both Bottom-Up qualitative as per Shkedi (2005) and quantitative analysis (descriptive statistics; z-score test for two population proportions and Pearson correlation). The study used several tools, including a structured open-ended questionnaire as well as a learning diary in order to gather qualitative data. Additionally, a conventional written test, along with e-assessments were used in order to provide quantitative data.

Three groups of variables were defined in this research:

1. Learners’ attitudes toward CBL: This group of variables includes learners’ attitudes as expressed in their written feedback on a structured open-ended questionnaire.

2. Context-based activities: Two types of context-based activities were studied: dedicated (formal) activities, and informal activities. The informal activities were assigned to one of three context-level categories (based on Cohen & Ezra, 2018; Ezra & Cohen, 2018): Learner (L) activities, wherein the content was not inherently related to the real-world context, but the learner made a connection; Content (C) activities, wherein the content was related to the real-world context only, but the learner noted note the relationship yet appeared unaware thereof; and Content-Learner (CL) activities, wherein the content was related to the real-world context and the learner made the connection. Note that Cohen and Ezra (2018) gave two separate definitions of ‘real-life’ (pertaining to the learner’s life) and ‘real-world’ (pertaining to the place where the learners are located), and the above-listed categories were for the real world only. Nonetheless, in the present study, no distinction was drawn between real life and real world, such that those categories apply to both learners’ lives and locale.

3. Student performance: These variables included scores on online assessment tasks as well as final scores on the written test. For each student, we calculated her average score of four online assessment tasks during the chemistry unit. At the end of the unit, students took a final written test using paper and pencil.

Participants

The case study discussed here was conducted in a private middle school in the Arab community in Israel during 2018. A 7th-grade class at this school was randomly selected from three classes in the same grade with an enrolment of 32 students: 17 boys, and 15 girls.

Research design

Based on Lo and Hew (2017), the intervention under investigation was taught for three weeks, each week of which included activities in three stages:

1. Pre-class activities, i.e. online activities at home before class: Students watched a video prepared by the teacher, which began with a demonstration of a phenomenon familiar to the students and that is related to their real world and real lives (macroscopic level). The video then offered a scientific explanation of the phenomenon (experiment), using scientific concepts and transferring scientific knowledge demonstrated by simulations (microscopic level). Three videos were recorded, one for each week (the videos are described in Table 1). Each recorded video was followed by online tasks, three of which included closed questions that provided students immediate feedback in the form of an automatically generated score. The fourth task was comprised of open-ended questions, after which students received feedback and scores at a later stage. The assignment also included links to animations and simulations that the students needed to view in order to answer the questions. The first three e-assessments were related to the scientific content of the weekly videos. Each e-assessment included closed questions such as multiple choice, fill in the blank (by selecting the correct answer from a provided word bank), and matching the correct answers (pairing), and others. Those questions aimed to assess the knowledge (remembering) and understanding (cognitive aspects) of each video. The final fourth e-assessment consisted of open-ended questions and was designed to assess knowledge (remembering), understanding (cognitive aspects), applying (using the scientific information in new situations such as explaining real-life and real-world phenomena or virtual experiments) by requiring students to write and formulate their answers rather than selecting from multiple given choices.

2. In-class activities, i.e. experiments conducted in small groups, in addition to worksheets relating the content to the students’ real-world and real-life contexts.

3. After-class activities. Context-based activities (dedicated and informal) carried out at home and presented in class. In addition to the dedicated activities assigned by the teacher, the students also engaged in informal activities in the context of their lives and situations, which they then presented in class.

At the end of the intervention carried out in the described learning unit, in the fourth week, the students took the final written test in the classroom. Notably, this final written test was taken to assess what they have learned, after completing the final online task at home (the fourth e-assessment).

Table 1. Detailed description of three recorded videos.

	Video 1 – Week 1	Video 2 – Week 2	Video 3 – Week 3
Screenshot
Content	Experiment, simulation and scientific explanation of effect of amount of gas on gas pressure; Thought-provoking questions	Experiment, simulation, and scientific explanation of effect of temperature on gas pressure or volume; Thought-provoking questions	Experiment, simulation, and scientific explanation of effect of temperature on aggregate states and volume of material; Thought-provoking questions
i. Introduction Experiment /phenomenon familiar to students’ real life and real world macro level	Sucking liquid up when drinking with a straw, which is contrary to the laws of gravity (earth’s gravity pulls downward); an experiment in which liquid is sucked into a glass containing a burning candle, and the liquid rises	Heating a balloon until it bursts	Building a liquid-alcohol temperature gauge that is then heated
ii. Animation: Particle model of material micro level	An animation that shows movement of gas particles as the amount of gas changes, affecting the gas pressure; Table of gas quantity and gas pressure values and graph of results	An animation that shows movement of particles as temperature rises, which affects the gas pressure; Table of temperature and gas pressure values and graph of results	An animation that shows movement of gas particles as gas temperature changes, which affects gas volume. The same is true for the liquid: How does the fluid particle movement change as the temperature of the liquid changes, affecting the volume of the liquid?
iii. Scientific explanation of the viewed experiment/phenomenon, depending on the particle model of the material	Scientific explanation of two phenomena observed in the video. The scientific explanation relies on the particle model of the material, and is used in the simulation to explain how the amount of gas affects the gas pressure and causes the liquid to rise upwards, against the earth’s gravitational force.	Scientific explanation of the phenomenon and experiment observed during the video. The scientific explanation relies on the particle model of the material, and is used in the simulation to explain how the temperature affects the gas pressure and how it causes the balloon to burst.	Scientific explanation of the phenomenon and experiment observed during the video. The scientific explanation relies on the particle model of the material, and is used in the simulation to explain how the temperature affects the volume of the material in a gaseous or liquid state.
iv. Thought-provoking questions	The video ends with thought-provoking questions about the experiment wherein liquid is pumped into a glass containing a burning candle, and rises.	The video ends with a question that prompts thinking, and links the content to another real-life and real-world phenomenon: Why should gas pressure be reduced in car tyres on hot days? The video invites students to draw their parents’ attention to this.	The video ends with two thought-provoking questions that connect the content to real life and the real world: Why leave spaces between railroad tracks? What do the electric wires on the road look like during the summer and winter seasons?

A summarisation of the CBL activities for each week in three stages: pre-class activities, in-class activities, and after-class activities is given in Figure 1. This design shows that four e-assessment activities were conducted during the entire intervention unit (one e-assessment per week during the 3-week period, and a final e-assessment at the end of the intervention). The students also took a conventional written test at the end of the unit. Thus, for each student we calculated an online assignment average in addition to her/his score on the written test. All students (N = 32) took the conventional written test, – 78.1% submitted all e-assessments, 18.7% submitted some of the e-assessments, and 3% did not submit any e-assessment at all. Notably, the pre-class e-assessment not only enables teachers to monitor and track student participation, but also assesses students’ comprehension of the pre-class videos. Grading is not the only target; it’s only one of many.

Figure 1. Summary of CBL activities each week.

At the beginning of the intervention, the students were given a printed ‘learning diary’ wherein they were asked to document all chemistry-related activities that they carried out via computer or mobile device, both dedicated (those assigned by the teacher) and informal (those that they did at their own initiative and were not assigned by the teacher). The assumption was that the informal activities would provide information on the learners’ level of awareness of CBL. For each activity (dedicated or informal), students were required to document the time and place of the activity, the device they used (computer / mobile phone or other), a brief description of the nature of the activity, and the extent to which the student believed the activity to be related to his or her real life or real world. The teacher collected the learning diaries at the end of the intervention. Of the 32 students, 27 submitted diaries.

In addition, students presented their informal activities to their classmates (N = 27). They were also asked to answer an open-ended questionnaire consisted of 6 items (N = 26) that reflected their attitudes toward, perceptions of, and opinions on the learning. Figure 2 summarises the proposed model of the FC approach used in this study.

Figure 2. Proposed model of FC context-based learning.

In-class activities included experiments, worksheets, and student presentations. While the study did not focus on the first two, it elaborated on the third. The students’ presentations were on the informal activities that they conducted and reported on it in their diaries (details in Table 5).

Data collection and research tools

The present study combines quantitative and qualitative methods, using several research tools written in Arabic since the participants are native Arabic speakers:

1. A structured open-ended questionnaire: Students were asked for feedback on their attitudes toward and perceptions of context-based chemistry learning using the FC approach by answering 6 open-ended questions (N = 26).

2. Learning diary wherein students documented their activities: The students were instructed to record any activity related to the topic of chemistry that they carried out using a computer or mobile phone. For each activity, students were asked to report its time, place, and content, as well as its relationship to real life or to the real world from their perspectives. Learners’ awareness of the relevance of chemistry to real life and the real world was determined by their ability to provide real-life and real-world examples and content related to the topic being studied (N = 27).

3. Assessment Tasks: The study used the students’ grades and averages of scores on four online assessment tasks that they performed during the intervention. In addition, at the end of the study unit, they took a final written (paper-and-pencil) test. Learners’ scores on the online assessment tasks were compared with their scores on the final pen-and-paper test (N = 32). Table 2 summarises all the study questions, tools, and methodology.

Table 2. Summary of the study: Questions, tools, and methodology.

Question no.	Study questions	Study tool	Methodology	N
1	What are the students’ attitudes toward CBL in a hybrid environment for learning chemistry? How do they perceive this environment?	Structured open-ended questionnaire (6 items)	Qualitative methods (coding and categorisation by 2 independent reviewers)	N = 26
2	Did the students carry out technology-assisted, chemistry-related informal activities, in addition to the dedicated ones? If so, how can these activities be characterised?	Learning diary	Quantitative methods (Descriptive statistics: z-score test for two population proportions)	N = 27
			Qualitative methods (Characterisation of informal activities by 2 independent reviewers)
3	Is there a correlation between student achievement on online assessment tasks and their achievement on the final written test?	Online tasks: e-assessment and final written (pen-and-paper) test	Quantitative methods (Pearson correlation)	N = 32

Research limitations

This research is designed as a case study, therefor its findings cannot be generalised. Furthermore, the limited number of participants, a key limitation, did not allow for extensive quantitative analysis of the informal activities. Nevertheless, in-depth exploration of the flipped classroom approach in conjunction with context-based learning was conducted. In addition, plagiarism on online assessment assignments cannot be ruled out, as the assignments were not completed in the classroom. It can be assumed that most students did complete the assessment tasks, but there is no assurance that they completed them alone, with no assistance. Further research is needed to investigate this issue of online assignments in the flipped classroom model while taking the present study’s limitations regarding reliability of the questions in the online assessment task into account.

Main findings

Q1: students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward CBL in a hybrid environment for teaching chemistry

Students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward CBL in the hybrid environment for teaching chemistry were analysed for: (1) Context-Based Learning; (2) online video-based learning (FC); (3) online assessment tasks.

The students’ perceptions and attitudes were coded, characterised and grouped into six primary categories derived from the students’ data:

1. Cognitive aspects included students’ references to their understanding of the subject matter, their performance and achievement, and their concentration and memory.

2. Affective aspects included students’ references to peace of mind, pleasure and interest, and comfort.

3. Relevance and context awareness included learners’ ability to provide real-life and real-world examples and content related to the topic being studied.

4. Flexibility aspects included the lack of time limitations (when? how much?), the lack of place restrictions (where?), and the accessibility of resources anytime and anywhere (books, notebooks, the internet).

5. Learner responsibility aspects included attention to processes that developed learners’ responsibility for their learning.

6. Learner affinity for technology referred to learners’ preferences for technology-based learning methods.

Table 3 shows the coding and categorisation of perceptions and attitudes emerging from the structured open-ended questionnaire, along with examples of students’ remarks.

Table 3. Coding and categorisation of student perceptions and attitudes (students' remarks were translated from Arabic).

Main category	Sub-category	No. of students who mentioned category (out of 26)	Students’ remarks
Students’ attitudes toward and perceptions of CBL in chemistry instruction
Cognitive aspects	Understanding	15	Student (23): “I could easily and quickly understand the content delivered by the videos. Seeing the animations and how the particles moved in different states of matter and [at] various temperatures helped me a lot to understand the subject.”
Affective aspects	Interest	14	Student (17): “learning this way was much more interesting"
Relevance and context awareness	Relevance awareness	13	Students gave examples of phenomena from real life and the real world related to the scientific content. The phenomena mentioned: “Tyres” – [Why should tire pressure be checked, especially in summer? – Effect of temperature on gas volume] “Balloons” – [Why do balloons explode outdoors in summer? – Effect of temperature on gas pressure] “Drinking straw” – [Why does liquid rise inside a straw, against gravity? – Effect of gas amount on gas pressure] “Railroad tracks” – [Why leave spaces between railroad tracks? – Effect of temperature on state of material aggregation “Cola bottle” – [Why shouldn’t you leave a cola bottle in a closed vehicle in the summer? – Effect of temperature on gas pressure] “Candle and glass” – [Why does the liquid enter the glass and rise? – Effect of amount of gas on gas pressure]
Students’ attitudes toward distance learning via videos
Learner affinity for technology	Learner affinity for technology	7	Student (22): "I liked this way of learning because we use computer and mobile devices".
Learner responsibility aspects	Learners’ responsibility	3	Student (4): “I like that we take responsibility for our learning.”
Flexibility aspects	Time limitations	2	Student (12): “I liked the videos because we can view them several times. We are not limited by when we can watch them and how many times we can watch them.”
Students’ attitudes toward online assessment tasks
Affective aspects	Peace of mind	12	Student (10): “I suggest incorporating online tasks as an alternative assessment means because we’re not stressed while doing them; we are relaxed and calm.”
	Convenience	2	Student (7): “It’s a good idea to use e-tasks for assessment because we’re not limited as to time (how many times? How long?). We can check whether our answers are correct, and we feel more comfortable at home than in class.”
Cognitive aspects	Achievements	10	Student (11): “In e-tasks I can check whether my answers are correct, so I can get a score of 100 for sure.”
	Concentration and memory	4	Student (12): “I prefer online assessment tasks over conventional tests because conventional tests make me tense. I often forget some of the content and don’t feel focused.”
Flexibility aspects	Resources availability	6	Student (31): “I liked the online assessment tasks because we can surf the web and look for related information while doing the tasks. And we can also use the textbook and our summaries.”
	Time limitations	6	Student (11): “Online assessment tasks are not time limited like conventional tests. We’re given a range of dates to submit them, sometimes a week (when?). And we have unlimited time to solve them (how long?). Conventional tests have a time limit, and sometimes the time isn’t enough, and I feel stressed.”

Q2: characteristics of the informal activities

The descriptive statistics revealed that a total of 105 dedicated study activities were conducted during the study, compared to only 22 informal activities performed on a computer or mobile device. Those dedicated and informal activities were documented by 27 students through the physical learning diaries. Table 4 shows the descriptive statistics for the dedicated and informal activities carried out on a computer or a mobile device.

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for dedicated and informal activities performed on computer or mobile device and documented through the physical learning diaries (N = 27).

	Sum activities	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. deviation
Computer dedicated	69.0	.0	4.0	2.55	1.33
Mobile dedicated	36.0	.0	4.0	1.33	1.27
Computer informal	6.0	.0	2.0	0.22	0.50
Mobile informal	16.0	.0	2.0	0.59	0.74

Based on the findings presented in Table 4, it is interesting to note the differences in students’ preferences. It appears that students preferred using mobile devices for informal activities more than using computers. Conversely, they showed a preference for using computers for dedicated activities rather mobile devices. To determine the significance of these differences, a z-score test for two population proportions was conducted between mobile phone use for dedicated activities (36 out of 105) and mobile phone use for informal activities (16 out of 22). The test results showed a statistically significant difference (Z-score = −3.3341, p < 0.01) between the two types of use (mobile phone versus computer), pointing to wider use of mobile phones for informal activities versus wider use of computers for dedicated activities.

Regarding the real-world and real-life context levels of the informal activities, the results showed that of the 22 activities, only four were defined as content (C) activities (i.e. the content was related to the real-world context as the phenomenon being studied can arise in the student’s daily life, but the learner did not note this relationship and appeared unaware of it). Only one informal activity was defined as a learner (L) activity (i.e. the content was not inherently related to the real-world context as such an experiment can be conducted only in a laboratory with dedicated lab equipment such as Erlenmeyer labware, so that such an experiment would not arise in the student’s real life, nor in her real world; but the learner made a connection between this activity and its relevance to real-life/real-world). Finally, 17 activities were defined as content-learner (CL) activities (i.e. the content was related to the real-world context, and the learner made the connection), see Table 5.

Table 5. Examples of students’ informal activities (out of class) according to their context level.

Student no.	Informal activity description	Relevance to real life/real world (according to the learners(	Relevance to real life/real world (according to the researchers)	Characterisation of activity (according to adapted model)
9	Conducting an experiment at home using materials found at home: Reaction between acetic acid and baking soda. The experiment was viewed on YouTube. (Related content: state of matter and gas pressure. Real life/real world: baking soda in cookies)	–	+	Content
23	Conducting an experiment: How to take an egg out of a bottle without breaking it. The experiment was viewed on YouTube. (Related content: gas pressure)	+	–	Learner
11	Virtual experiment on Ofek (educational website): Styrofoam and ice density testing. (Related content: state of matter, density, mass, volume, and microscopic level. Real life/real world: ice cubes float on the cola)	+	+	Content-Learner
16	Conducting an experiment using household materials to test density: egg, water, and salt (Related content: state of matter, density, mass, volume, and microscopic level. Real life/real world: Process for pickling cucumbers and olives; swimming in the Dead Sea)	+	+	Content-Learner

Q3: correlation between student achievements on online assessment tasks and on conventional test

All students (N = 32) took the conventional written test, 78.1% submitted all e-assessments, 18.7% submitted some of the e-assessments, and 3% didn't submit any e-assessment at all. Pearson analysis was conducted to examine the correlation between students’ achievements on the online assessment tasks (M = 73.938, SD = 23.1) and their achievements on the conventional written test (M = 73.969, SD = 18.4). The analysis revealed a strong positive correlation (r = 0.630, p < 0.01).

Discussion

The findings revealed that the middle school students in this case study have positive attitudes toward CBL in a hybrid environment for learning chemistry by means of FC strategy. Context-based flipped classes have been found in this study as in previous research to incorporate innovative technology, require learners to take personal responsibility for their learning process (Sletten, 2017), and facilitate time and place flexibility (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Henderson, 2016; Herreid & Schiller, 2013). The current specific case study, which researched students’ attitudes toward distance learning from videos in an FC environment, was conducted among middle school students, as opposed to most similar studies that are conducted in higher education or high schools (King & Henderson, 2018). As researchers and teachers, we are encouraged by these findings, which show that we should not be concerned about incorporating learning through technology into instruction of younger pupils, and should continue to expand this strategy.

In addition, as presented herein, incorporating technology provides pupils access to information and educational resources, as well as the ability to search for information during the lesson.

The most positive learner attitudes emerging from the study were related to the online assessment tasks. Researchers explain this in terms of the benefit of flexibility in performing the task, i.e. when learners can do the task and how much time they are allowed to spend on it (e.g. Henderson, 2016; Noguera et al., 2019), the availability of resources (books, notes, the internet), and the high levels of concentration, relaxation, freedom from stress, and convenience that these tasks afforded the learners (e.g. Noguera et al., 2019). These aspects render online assessment tasks easier than standard tests from the students’ point of view, ultimately leading to higher scores, indicating more content learned.

Previous research also indicated that learners have positive attitudes regarding online assessments, although for differing reasons, such as the benefit of instant feedback from automated online assessment tasks (e.g. Bahar & Asil, 2018; Whitelock, 2006). Contrary to the findings of the current study described here, other studies (e.g. Patronis et al., 2019) revealed that students in upper secondary school or higher education actually prefer written (‘pen-and-paper’) exams.

The structured open-ended questionnaire revealed the learners’ positive attitudes toward CBL in the hybrid setting for learning chemistry. As in other studies (e.g. Bennett et al., 2007; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017), this approach was backed by strong testimony from the learners that they understood the scientific content, which was clearer due to the CBL approach. Furthermore, as in other studies, the learners in this study expressed a high level of pleasure and interest in this approach (Avargil et al., 2012; King, 2012; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017). In addition, the current research findings described herein show that CBL in chemistry instruction helps learners to see how the curriculum is relevant to phenomena that they encounter in real life and the real world. These findings are similar to those of previous studies (e.g. Bennett & Lubben, 2003; King & Henderson, 2018; Stolk et al., 2016; Wannagatesiri et al., 2017).

This study’s findings point to a significant difference between the types of devices that students used to perform the informal and dedicated activities. The students preferred to use a computer for dedicated activities, while they preferred a mobile phone for informal activities. These findings suggest new research directions, for example exploring how young students perceive objects in terms of digital self-efficacy, how digital self-efficacy can be increased, and how students perceive an electronic device in terms of its possible uses.

Learners’ achievements on the online assignments were found to be strongly correlated with their achievement on the final written test. This suggests that online assessment tasks are useful in assessing learners’ performance, and perhaps even serve them as a means of preparing for written tests. This suggestion needs further study, and can serve as a guide for further research. We also recommend investigating the validity and reliability of online assessments and evaluating their suitability for various populations and age groups.

The research literature pointed to a strong correlation between student involvement (frequency of completing online exercises and participating in online experiences) and their achievements on the final test: Students who did not submit online assessment tasks failed the final test, whereas students who completed the online assessment tasks exhibited increases both in their self-assessment scores and in online assessment scores, and obtained higher scores on the final (written) test (Henderson, 2016).

The research described herein can add to the existing body of knowledge about learners’ attitudes toward the FC approach, as well as to knowledge about online assessments. This study can help reduce the gap pointed out by Bahar and Asil (2018), who noted that despite the wealth of research on attitudes toward computer-based teaching, researchers should expand their focus to include attitudes toward online assessments. Moreover, this research can help in the development of curricula and pedagogy for teachers. Stolk et al. (2016) noted that the successful implementation of a pedagogical approach that relies on CBL requires professional development for teachers. Although many studies have been conducted on the flipped classroom as well as on online assessments, thus far, very few studies have combined these two aspects by investigating online assessments as a tool to support learning in the flipped class approach. Thus far, one of the few studies to research this combination is that of Henderson (2016). Similarly, while many studies have investigated the use of CBL in science learning among high school and college students, very few such studies have examined middle schoolers in this context (King & Henderson, 2018). The study described herein can narrow the current gap in the research literature examining science-based learning for middle school students.

This study also sheds light on a topic that was neither defined by the study itself nor answered a specific research question: the emotional aspect of this type of learning, as reported by the students. Students reported high levels of relaxation, peace of mind, and comfort when doing the online assessments; and high levels of stress and anxiety surrounding traditional written tests, which are limited in time, location, and available resources and tools. Learners’ statements in this study reveal the extended value of online assessments and suggest new research directions.

Conclusions

The results of this case study indicate that middle school students have positive attitudes toward CBL in chemistry using the FC method. Our findings show that educators and researchers alike integrating technology-based learning among young learners is strongly recommended. In addition, the FC strategy can be expanded further.

The study also highlighted differences between students’ device preferences for performing informal versus dedicated learning activities. Specifically, students preferred computers for dedicated activities and mobile phones for informal activities. These findings give us a glimpse into how young learners perceive digital self-efficacy and how it can be promoted by using mobile devices for dedicated activities as well as informal activities. In addition, utilising smartphone applications or notes as a learning diary instead of pen and paper for reporting informal activities, alongside professional development training for teachers should be further explored. Notably, more qualitative insights into the combination of formal and informal learning activities at the middle school level are needed.

Furthermore, the study revealed a strong correlation between learners’ achievements on online tasks and their achievements on the final written test, suggesting that online tasks can serve as a useful tool for assessing learners’ performance, potentially even serving as a preparation for final tests. However, the validity and reliability of e-assessments and their suitability for various populations and age groups should be further valuated.

The study also revealed an emotional aspect of online learning, as it was neither defined by the current study itself nor in the research questions. Students reported experiencing high levels of relaxation, peace of mind, and comfort while engaging in e-assessments, versus high levels of stress and anxiety surrounding traditional written tests. This finding highlights the value of e-assessments and suggests new research directions, such as investigating the effect of e-assessment on students with exam anxiety and students with learning disabilities.

Acknowledgements

This research received the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. The consent forms were sent for signing and approval.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data will be supplied upon request (all in Arabic).