Introduction
The explosion of online courses, especially at the graduate level requires instructors to find creative delivery
methods to promote functional and engaging learning. The advent of smartphones, tablets, and iPads, and “always
connected devices” coupled with broadband wireless, data plans, and Wi-Fi technologies to support these devices
make them viable tools to support teaching and learning. The more these technologies are infused in teaching and
learning the more we understand the paradigm shift from learning in a traditional classroom to learning anywhere
and at any time. This new and expanding phenomenon supported by smartphones, tablets, iPads, and different
wireless technologies is what is evolved into what we now know as mobile learning (Muyinda, 2007; Bull, 2013).
Since 2009, The Horizon Report identified mobiles and mobile computing as one of six areas of emerging
technologies that will significantly impact 21st century education, (The Horizon Report, 2009; 2010; 2011). Mobile
learning in terms of its supporting hardware is still evolving as an education tool. This continuous change makes
mobile learning pedagogy both a challenge and a benefit to 21st century learning (Muyinda, 2007). The challenge for
educators is to figure the pedagogical uses of mobile learning and how to maximize its uses in teaching and learning.
This paper seeks to address how the concept of “double flipping of the classroom” guided by the i-Technological
Pedagogical and Content Knowledge Asynchronous and Synchronous (iTPACK-AS) theoretical framework, (Bull,
2013), supports online and mobile learning. See Figure 1 iTPACK. A benefit of mobile learning is that it provides
educational systems with a delivery structure of learning anytime and anywhere.
Figure 1: i-Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (iTPACK-AS) Model
Flipping the Classroom Concept
Flipping of the classroom is a new and growing phenomenon taking roots in high school and college education
sectors, (Khan, 2011). Khan argues that flipped classroom “humanize the classroom.” Flipping of the classroom is a
pedagogical concept and method that provides students with opportunities to review, discuss, and explore course
content independently outside the traditional classroom, via the Web, and provides an in-depth analysis of concepts
and project-based learning in the traditional classroom. The traditional flipping of the classroom requires that
students review lecture materials outside of class and then come to class prepared to engage in instructor guided
learning activities. Double flipping of the classroom, the core of this paper, requires that students and instructor
create and share multimedia files to facilitate teaching and learning. A key factor for effectively flipping of the
classroom is planning. According to Hughes (2012), “strategies for moving the lecture out of the classroom include:
selecting what course content you want students to cover outside of class in place of the traditional lecture, deciding
how you want that content organized, choosing what media to use to deliver that content to students outside of class,
creating or gathering the learning materials, and then making the materials available for students to access outside of
class.” (p. 11).
Zappe et al., (2009) suggested guidelines for flipping of the classroom, which included, but not limited to the
following:


Students are expected to review and complete flipped materials before class.
Flipped materials, especially videos should be relatively short (no longer than 20 -30 minutes) in order to
ensure that students watch them.


Instructors should briefly review flipped course content with students during in-class activities to make sure
that the majority of students have sufficient understanding of the materials.
Flipped materials should include multi-media materials to keep students interested and engaged in the
material.
This paper provides a template of how to integrate double flipping of the classroom pedagogical concept in graduate
online courses. Advances in multimedia provide the transformation edge for flipping of the classroom, (Lage, Platt,
and Treglia, 2000; TechSmith, 2012) or double flipping of the classroom as presented in this article. Lage, Platt, and
Treglia also argued that flipping a classroom demand that students take ownership of the classroom instruction. This
demand is more evident in the “double flipping of the classroom” where students serve as both consumers and
producers of content. Flipping of the classroom also allows students to learn at their pace and time, (Schaffhauser,
2011). Studies show that flipping a classroom promotes effective use of class time, increases classroom engagement,
increases student’s understanding of concepts, and meaning engagement of instructor’s time with problem-solving
activities, (Foertsch, Moses, Strikwerda, Litzkow, 2002; Zappe et al., 2009; Houston & Lin, 2012).
Double flipping of the classroom is a bidirectional exchange of multimedia and digital files. Below are some
guidelines for double flipping of the classroom:
 requires students and instructors to create, share, and review audio and video files to support synchronous
and asynchronous learning.
 utilizes commercially created files and multimedia files mined from the web to support teaching and
learning.
 requires instructors to create, identify, and share lecture multimedia files.
 Requires students to engage in forum discussions prior to synchronous discussions to engage in more
meaning discussions, activities, and project designs.
 requires students to transform traditional assignments, article reviews, chapter presentations, and other
projects to multimedia files. These files are sometimes shared to promote best practices.
 requires students to submit accompanying papers with multimedia projects.
 evaluation includes grading both multimedia products and digital files.
iTPACK-AS Theoretical Framework
The ever changing face of technology in education, steep learning curves of some technologies, the advent and
expansion of mobile learning, the complexities of teaching with technology and engaging students in online learning
process demands that higher education programs prepare candidates to understand the relationship between Internet
or web-based delivery modalities (i), technology knowledge (TK), content knowledge (CK), and pedagogical
knowledge (PK) as defined in the Internet Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (iTPACK) framework
designed for online, e-learn, and mobile learning (Bull, 2013). The iTPACK framework is a paradigm shift from the
traditional TPACK framework developed for face-to-face teaching to an online delivery model that includes both
electronic and mobile learning systems. See Figure 2. The iTPACK model is an offshoot of the TPACK framework,
(Koehler & Mistra, 2005; Mishra & Koehler, 2006.) See Figure 2. iTPACK is designed to guide 21st century
teachers, instructors, and professors to teach in online learning environment and for students to learn in online
settings. Studies show that teacher education programs do not adequately prepare preservice teachers with
knowledge and experiences needed to effectively integrate technology in their classrooms (Milken Exchange on
Education Technology, 1999; Bull, 2010). This argument holds true for teaching and delivering instruction online.
Teachers, instructors and professors are not adequately prepared to teach in online settings to support an effective
delivery system for online and mobile learning (Bull, 2013). The need for a theoretical framework for mobile and
online instructional technology delivery is important to prepare preservice teachers, in-service teachers, professors,
and 21st century learners to understand, plan for, and integrate technology in online education process.
Figure 2: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
With the growth of online courses and virtual high schools, teacher education programs have the onus to ensure that
teacher candidates are trained on how to deliver engaging and functional online learning. Figure 2 shows the original
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK).
Internet TPACK – Asynchronous and Synchronous
There are three major components of iTPACK: iTPACK- Synchronous (iTPACK-S), iTPACK Asynchronous
(iTPACK-A), and iTPACK Asynchronous and Synchronous (iTPACK AS). See Figure 1. iTPACK-AS is defined as
blended delivery of live and delayed teaching and learning via the Internet as part of course or class teaching. This
research focuses on the iTPACK-AS. The interaction that takes place in the iTPACK-AS delivery model yields
several dynamic interactions.
Technology Knowledge
Internet Asynchronous Technology Knowledge (iATK) is a delayed delivery interaction between instructor and
students via the web utilizing a learning managements system and application and design tools. iATK utilizes
learning management systems like Blackboard, Sakai, Moodle, Edmodo and files produced from other software
programs and tools, like text messaging, twitter, blogs, audio podcasts and video podcasts, PowerPoint, Excel, Word
documents, or html pages to support instruction. The key characteristic of this model is that the instructor ensures
that students are able to receive information and send feedback to the instructor and peers (Harley et. al., (2007). On
the other hand, the Internet Synchronous Technology Knowledge (i-STK) is live web-based delivery interaction
utilizing technologies such as Elluminate, video conferencing, Skype, Facetime and other interfaces requiring use of
a webcam or audio system by the instructor. Key characteristics of this interaction require instructors to coordinate
live delivery of information and coordinate students’ ability to interact with peers and instructors in real time. A
blend of iATK and iSTK provides an ideal model of for knowledge delivery.
Technology Pedagogical Knowledge
Internet Asynchronous Technology Pedagogical Knowledge (iATPK) interaction deals with the fundamental
concepts of what technological processes and protocols to implement for delayed integration. Protocols for
asynchronous interactions should be clearly defined and presented to students at the beginning of the course. Internet
Synchronous Technology Pedagogical Knowledge (iSTPK) deals with the fundamental concepts of what processes
to implement for different technologies integrated in real time. Technologies integrated either at the technology
interface level or technology applications or files level have pedagogical processes that instructors should address to
ensure successful implementation. For example, use of Facetime requires that students have access to the technology
on their own devices and Wi-fi with capable bandwidth to handle the traffic. A blend of iSTPK and iATPK provides
an ideal model for effective understanding of technology pedagogical knowledge in online teaching and learning.
Pedagogical Knowledge
Internet Synchronous Pedagogical Knowledge (iSPK) deals with skills required to teach or deliver instructor in a
live format. For example, live interaction requires instructors to set guidelines for protocols used to deliver and
receive information. Effective online classroom management is a key component under this category. Interactions
vary with different tools. What may be a guideline for an Elluminate live session may not be the same protocol for a
group Skype session or a one-on-one interaction with student. Also, depth of presentation, engagement between
participants and participants, and participants and instructor should be clearly defined. What may be a guideline for
Twitter may not be the same for a forum or blog. Also, depth of presentation, engagement in terms of interaction
between participants and participants, and participants and instructor should be clearly defined. Technologies
integrated either at the technology interface or technology applications or files have pedagogical processes that
instructors should address to ensure successful implementations. A blend of iSPK and iAPK provides an ideal model
for understanding technology pedagogical knowledge synchronously and asynchronously.
Content Knowledge
Internet Asynchronous Content Knowledge (iACK) interaction addresses delayed delivery of content by instructor
and students. On the other hand, content delivered live falls under the category of Internet Synchronous Content
Knowledge (iSCK). A blend of iACK and iSCK provides an ideal model for an online delivery of content.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Internet Asynchronous Pedagogical Content Knowledge (iAPCK) interaction addresses how specific teaching
methods relate to a content area addressed in a delayed delivery system. Instructors should be creative in ensuring
that delivery addresses multiple learning styles of students that tap into their multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983;
Kelly, 2008). Internet Synchronous Pedagogical Content Knowledge (iSPCK) addresses how specific teaching
methods relating to content are addressed in a live delivery of instruction in mobile and online settings. How well an
instructor is able to transfer knowledge from a face-to-face teaching to live or delayed delivery determines the
effectiveness of the transfer of knowledge for an online delivery. Though the content may be the same, the
pedagogical aspects for delayed and live online delivery are different. Instructors need to address pedagogical issues
relating to delivery content live online (Gardner, 1983; Kelly, 2008).
Internet Asynchronous Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (iTPACK-AS)
The iTPACK-AS is the dynamic interactions of iAPK, iSPK iACK, iSCK, iACK, and iSTK between students,
instructor and online learning environment. See Table 1 and Table 2 for different types of technologies that support
the iTPACK-AS model of delivery.
Table 1: Asynchronous Delivery Technologies
Asynchronous Delivery Mode
Technology
Blackboard
Moodle
Video Podcasts
Streaming Videos
Twitter
Audio Podcasts
PowerPoint Presentation
Prezi
Electronic Forum
Web logs (Blogs)
Social Networking
Voice Thread
Reflective Papers
Handouts
Google Apps
Web site links
e-Books
Emails
Useful for
Dialogue and discussion that takes place over a
period of time
Dialogue and discussion that takes place over a
period of time
Communicating or teaching
Communicating or teaching
Sharing ideas
Communicating or teaching
Presentations, resources and teaching
Presentations, resources and teaching
Sharing ideas and comments
Sharing ideas and comments
Sharing ideas and comments
Communicating, teaching, sharing ideas and
comments
Sharing information, providing resources and
references
Sharing information, providing resources and
references
Sharing, coordinating activities, teaching, and
communicating
Providing resources, research and references
Teaching and training
One-to-one or one to group communications
Document libraries
You Tube, Vimeo, Screencast
Managing resources for access by participants
Presentation, teaching, and resources
Table 2: Synchronous Delivery Technologies
Synchronous Delivery Mode
Technology
Useful for
Skype
Dialogue and discussion that takes place
Oovoo
over a period of time
Elluminate
Communicating or teaching
Facetime (iPad or iPhone)
Communicating or teaching
Video Conferencing
Sharing ideas
Chat
Communicating or teaching
Instant Messaging
Presentations, resources and teaching
Telepresence
Presentations, resources and teaching
Facebook
Dialogue, discussion, and presentation
Social Networking
Dialogue, discussion, and presentation
Twitter
Dialogue, discussion, and presentation
Edmodo
Dialogue, discussion, and presentation
Research Study
This study focuses on using double flipping of a graduate course with iTPACK-AS as the theoretical framework.
Another goal was to gain an understanding of students’ perceptions of double flipping a graduate course as delivery
model to support online and mobile learning. Flipping classrooms, especially, double flipping a graduate course is a
new phenomenon. Its pedagogy is relatively new as an educational tool making it a good tool to study with
iTPACK-AS as its framework.
Research Questions
The overarching question is how can educators ensure that effective and functional learning take place in online
graduate courses? Double flipping in a graduate course is guided by three main questions:
1.
2.
3.
How effective was double flipping a graduate course on students’ learning?
What are students’ perceptions of double flipping a graduate level course?
In what ways can the flipping delivery method be used to enhance the educational experience?
Research Participants
The research was conducted in a graduate technology course in fall 2012 at a public university in the southeastern
region of the United States of America. A total of 25 students participated in the research study.
Double Flipping of Classroom Procedure
In double flipping of the classroom both students and instructors produced and shared files. All multimedia files
created to support double flipping of the classroom were downloadable files or could be accessed from the Internet.
The Instructor
The course instructor designed, developed, and facilitated the double flipping of the classroom concept to support an
online graduate course that utilizes both synchronous and asynchronous delivery methods. Prior to the
implementation of the double flipping of the classroom concept all participants were trained to create audio podcasts
using Audacity software, and video podcasts using Camtasia software. Participants were also provided with a
multimedia portal, Screencast.com, to upload audio and video podcasts to share to the class. Screencast.com
generates URLs for video and audio files posted. URLs are then disseminated via emails to peers or uploaded to
Blackboard. The course also utilized Blackboard for asynchronous delivery and Blackboard Collaborate for
synchronous delivery. The instructor designed video podcasts instructional materials to supplement course
instruction. In addition, all synchronous sessions conducted via Blackboard Collaborate were recorded and made
available to students after each session. Instructor received and reviewed students’ assignments and presentations
submitted as video and audio podcasts, reflective papers, discussion forums, and online quizzes.
Students
Students participated in the double flipping of the course as both consumers and producers of knowledge. Students
reviewed multimedia lectures and supplemental materials posted by instructor before a synchronous class session.
Each week a student led a chapter discussion. Prior to the class presentation, the presenter designs a multimedia
presentation, which is uploaded to screencast.com or to Blackboard for peers to review. All students in the course
were required to view the multimedia presentation before the scheduled synchronous session, reflect on the contents
of the chapter via Blackboard’s Discussion Forum section, and engage in ongoing discussion in the forum with
peers. This was then followed by a synchronous discussion led by the presenter. This session was also recorded and
made available to all students at the end of the session. Each student was required to review a current article aligned
with the student learning outcomes and competencies of the course. Article reviews were also recorded as
multimedia presentations and followed the same steps outlined for a chapter presentation with the exception that a
copy of the article is made available to peers. Finally, students were encouraged to record written assignments as
audio or video presentations with accompanying paper or script. For all presentation activities listed above, students
were required to create an audio or video presentation and upload contents for other students to review at least one
week before a scheduled presentation date. All students were required to review video podcasts, listen to audio
podcasts, and engage in ongoing discussions posted in Blackboard’s Discussion Forum section prior to the
scheduled synchronous class address the content of the multimedia file.
Research Methods
The study utilized both qualitative and quantitative design methods. Participants completed a post-survey at the end
of the course. They also participated in a focus group sessions at the end of the semester. The survey allowed
participants to rank double flipping concepts, double flipping for synchronous, and double flipping for asynchronous
in 10 categories; Important, Interesting, Relevant, Exciting, Means a lot, Appealing, Fascinating, Valuable,
Involving and Needed on a 7 point scale. The participants ranked each category from 1-7 with one being the lowest
and seven being the highest. The mean was analyzed on a 70-point scale. Researchers developed the instrument.
Using SPSS (now IBM PASW) the Cronbach alpha reliability test will be determined. Cronbach’s alpha reliability
coefficient normally ranges between 0 and 1. However, there is actually no lower limit to the coefficient. The closer
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is to 1.0 the greater the internal consistency of the items in the scale. An alpha of .8 is
probably a reasonable goal. It should also be noted that while a high value for Cronbach’s alpha indicates good
internal consistency of the items in the scale, it does not mean that the scale is one-dimensional.
The purpose of the focus group sessions was to collect and analyze information on the perceptions of participants on
the use of the double flipping of the classroom concepts in delivery instruction in their courses. Themes, categories
and trends were identified and analyzed using triangulation of information. The following are examples of questions
that addressed during the focus group discussion:
(a) What are your thoughts about using the double flipping of the classroom concept in delivering online
instruction?
(b) How did the double flipping of the classroom concept enhance your learning in the course?
(c) What did you like in particular about the double flipping of the classroom concept at the graduate level?
(d) What did you like least about the double flipping of the classroom concept? What recommendations
would you make to address perceived areas of improvement?
Research Findings
Data is being collected and analyzed through December 2012. A detail analysis of findings and recommendations
will be available by conference date. Initial review of preliminary data show the following positive impact of double
flipping of classroom: 1) effective use of instructional time, 2) students as creators of knowledge, 3) content
knowledge designed both by instructor and students is archived for use to support asynchronous and synchronous
learning, 4) students learn as their own pace and time, 5) skills required to design audio and video files are
prerequisite skills to flip the classroom, 6) instructor’s knowledge of how to flip a course is significant to successful
implementation, 7) the nature of the student is key to successful implementation of flipping a course, 8) flipping
supports both asynchronous and synchronous learning, and 9) double flipping promotes mobile learning. All
multimedia files created were download files to smartphones, computers and tablets to listen and watch anywhere
and anytime.
References
Albion, P. R., Jamison-Proctor, R. & Finger, G. (2010). Auditing the TPACK Confidence of Australian Pre-service
Teachers: The TPACK Confidence Survey (TCS). In Maddux, C., Gibson, D., and Dodge, B. (Eds.),
Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2010 (pp. 303-312).Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Bull, P. H. (2013). Internet Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (iTPACK): A Theoretical
Framework for Mobile Learning. In H. Yang, & S. Wang (Eds.) Cases on E-Learning Management:
Development and Implementation (pp. 19-49). Hersey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:
10.4018/978-1- 4666-1933-3.ch002
Bull, P. (2010). Spatial Constructivist Thinking Theory: A Framework To Address Needs of Digital Visual
Learners. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications 2010 (pp. 1297-1302). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/34799.
Bull, P.H. & McCormick, C. (2011). Mobile Learning: Enhancing a Pre-Algebra Course at a Community College
with Text Messaging . International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Vol. 8.
No. 1. January 2011. ISSN 1550-6908. Retrieved March 14, 2012, from
http://itdl.org/Journal/jan_11/article03.htm
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books
Harley, D., Winn, S., Pemberton, S., & Wilcox, P. (2007).Using texting to support students' transition to
university.Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44 (3), 229-241.
Harris, J., Grandgenett, N., & Hofer, M. (2010).Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric.
In C.D. Maddux (Ed.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2010(pp. 223-234).
Chesapeake, VA:AACE. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE).
Ho, K. & Albion, P. (2010). Hong Kong Home Economics teachers’ preparedness for teaching with technology. In
C.D. Maddux (Ed.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2010(pp. 313-322).
Chesapeake, VA:AACE. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE).
Hofer, M. & Harris, J. (2010).Differentiating TPACK Development: Using learning activity types with inservice and
preservice teachers.In C.D. Maddux (Ed.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education
2010(pp.295-302). Chesapeake, VA:AACE. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
(SITE).
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009).The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Kelly, D. (2008). Adaptive versus learner control in a multiple intelligence learning environment. Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(3), 307-336. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from
http://www.editlib.org/p/24252
Khan, S. (2011, March 9). Salman Khan talk at TED 2011 [Video webcast]. Last retrieved on October
Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2005).Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher
Education, 21 (3), 94-102.
Lage, M. J., Platt, G.J., Treglia M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning
environment. Journal of Economic Education.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new framework for teacher
knowledge. Teacher College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Muyinda, Paul B. (2007). "MLearning: pedagogical, technical and organisational hypes and realities", Campus-Wide
Schauffhauser, D. (2011). The Backward Class. The Journal.
Zappe, S., Leicht, R., Messner, J., Litzinger, T., Lee, H., (2009). “Flipping” the Classroom to Explore Active
Learning in a Large Undergraduate Course. American Society for Engineering Education.