International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2022, Vol. 18(3) 121-137

Using Cooperative Learning and the Flipped Classroom Model with Prospective Teachers To Increase Digital Literacy Self-Efficacy, Technopedagogical Education, and 21st-Century Skills Competence

Serkan Aslan

pp. 121 - 137   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2108-09-0002.R1

Published online: June 01, 2022  |   Number of Views: 127  |  Number of Download: 217


The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of cooperative learning on the digital literacy self-efficacy, technopedagogical education competence, and 21st-century skills competence perceptions of prospective teachers based on the flipped classroom model. The research used an experimental pattern with pretest-posttest and a control group, which is one of the semi-experimental models. The participants were 68 prospective science teachers studying at the 2nd and 3rd grades at a public university in the 2019–2020 academic year. Three scales were used to develop the data collection tool for the study: a Digital Literacy Self-Efficacy Scale; a Technopedagogical Education Competence Scale, and a 21st-Century Skills Competence Perception Scale. The results showed that a cooperative learning model and a flipped classroom model were both significantly effective in developing the pre-service teachers’ skills. However, this study showed that cooperative learning used in conjunction with the flipped classroom model was more effective than the cooperative learning model used alone. It is recommended that technology-based student-centered models be used in teacher training programs.

Keywords: Cooperative/Collaborative Learning, Distance Education and Online Learning, Improving Classroom Teaching, Teaching/Learning Strategies, 21st Century Abilities

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Aslan, S. (2022). Using Cooperative Learning and the Flipped Classroom Model with Prospective Teachers To Increase Digital Literacy Self-Efficacy, Technopedagogical Education, and 21st-Century Skills Competence . International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(3), 121-137. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2022.439.9

Aslan, S. (2022). Using Cooperative Learning and the Flipped Classroom Model with Prospective Teachers To Increase Digital Literacy Self-Efficacy, Technopedagogical Education, and 21st-Century Skills Competence . International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(3), pp. 121-137.

Chicago 16th edition
Aslan, Serkan (2022). "Using Cooperative Learning and the Flipped Classroom Model with Prospective Teachers To Increase Digital Literacy Self-Efficacy, Technopedagogical Education, and 21st-Century Skills Competence ". International Journal of Progressive Education 18 (3):121-137. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2022.439.9.

  1. Akbulut, Y. (2011). SPSS applications in social sciences. İstanbul: İdeal. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anagün, Ş.S., Atalay, N., Kılıç, Z., & Yaşar, S. (2016). The development of a 21st century skills and competences scale directed at teaching candidates: validity and reliability study. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 40, 160-175.https://doi:10.9779/PUJE768 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Arslan, A. (2016). Effects of cooperative learning model on achievement, retention and attitudes in science teaching laboratory practice course. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Firat University, Elazig. [Google Scholar]
  4. Aslan, S. (2021a). The effect of the flipped classroom model on pre-service teachers’ digital literacy and digital pedagogical competencies. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(4), 73-89. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Aslan, S. (2021b). Flipped classroom model in Turkish teaching. S. Aslan & M. Müldür (Eds.) Contemporary approaches in Turkish teaching with application examples. Ankara: Ani. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ayçiçek, B. (2019). Flipped classroom model. In T. Yanpar-Yelken (Eds) Instructional technologies. (p., 119-140). Ankara: Ani. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ayçiçek, B., & Yanpar-Yelken, T. (2018). The effect of flipped classroom model on students’ classroom engagement in teaching English. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 385-398. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Aydemir, E. (2019). The impact of flipped classroom approach on the reading and writing achievement, self-regulated learning, and classroom interaction of pre-service English teachers. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Bahçeşehir University, Istanbul. [Google Scholar]
  9. Barkley, E.F., Cross, K.P., & Major, C.H. (2004). Collaborative learning techniques: Ahandbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bayrakçeken, S., Doymuş, K., & Doğan, A. (2015). Cooperative learning model and its implementation. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Reach every student in every class every day. United States Of America: Flip Your Classroom. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bishop, J.L., & Verleger, M.A. (2013,). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA. [Google Scholar]
  13. Budancamanak, M. (2017). The effects of cooperative learning on visual art teacher candidates' problem solving skills. Unpublished master’s thesis. Atatürk University, Erzurum. [Google Scholar]
  14. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2008). Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  15. Can, A. (2019). Quantitative data analysis in scientific research process with SPSS. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  16. Chilingaryan, K., & Zvereva, E. (2017). Methodology of flipped classroom as a learning technology in foreign language teaching. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237(21), 1500–1504. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Debbağ, M. (2019). The effectıiveness of the flipped classroom model designed for teaching principles and methods course curriculum. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu. [Google Scholar]
  18. Demiralay, R., & Karataş, S. (2014). Flipped classroom model. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 3(3), 333-340. [Google Scholar]
  19. Duman, İ. (2019). The effect of flipped classroom model incorporating activity-based learning on students’ academic achievement and learning motivation. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Sakarya University, Sakarya. [Google Scholar]
  20. Ekmekci, E. (2017). The flipped writing classroom in Turkish EFL context: A comparative study on a new model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 151-167. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Elian, S.M., & Hamaidi, D.A.H. (2018). The effect of using flipped classroom strategy on the academic achievement of fourth grade students in Jordan. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(2), 110-125 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Erbil, D.G. (2019). The effects of cooperative learning applied in flipped classroom on academic achievement and psychosocial variables. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir. [Google Scholar]
  23. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statics using SPSS. London: SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  24. Flumerfelt, S., & Green, G. (2013). Using lean in the flipped classroom for at risk students. Educational Technology and Society, 16(1), 356-366. [Google Scholar]
  25. Foldnes, N. (2016). The flipped classroom and cooperative learning: Evidence from a randomised experiment. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 39-49. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., & Hyun, H. (2014). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar]
  27. Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12–17. [Google Scholar]
  28. Green, S.B., & Salkind, N.J. (2013). Using SPSS for windows and macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. New Jersey:Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  29. Guo, S., Tian, Q., & Liu, Y. (2018). Study and pratice in flipped classroom based inquiry cooperative learning. 2017 7th International Conference on Education and Management (ICEM 2017 January). Atlantis Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Günüç, S., Odabaşı, H., & Kuzu, A. (2013). The defining characterıstıcs of students of the 21st century by student teachers: a twitter activity. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 9(4),436-455. [Google Scholar]
  31. Hamutoğlu, N.B. (2018). The effect of cloud computing technologies ın collaborative learning activities on university students’ acceptance, eligibility for responsibilitysharing, and learning performance. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Sakarya University, Sakarya. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hamutoğlu, N.B., Canan-Güngören, Ö., Kaya-Uyanık, G., & Gür-Erdoğan, D. (2017). Adapting digital literacy scale into Turkish. Journal of Education Aegean, 18(1), 408-429. [Google Scholar]
  33. İyi, E. (2018). The effect of different cooperative learning methods on pre-service science teachers' academic achievements and epistemological beliefs. Unpublished master’s thesis. Atatürk University, Erzurum. [Google Scholar]
  34. İyilikçi, O. (2020). SPSS and research patterns for psychologists. Ankara: Nobel. [Google Scholar]
  35. Johnson, D.W., Johnson R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1994). The new cirsles of learning: cooperation in the classroom and school. Alexandria. VA: Associationfor Supervision and Curriculum Development. [Google Scholar]
  36. Johnson, R.B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research (Quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches) .Calofornia: SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kabakçı-Yurdakul, I., Odabaşı, H.F., Kılıçer, K. Çoklar, A.N., Birinci, G.,& Kurt, A.A. (2012). The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep:A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Computers & Education, 58, 964-977. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  38. Karasar, N. (2006). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kirk, S., & Casenove, D. (2017). Flipping the academic writing classroom. In Computer Assisted Language Learning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applicaitoıns,   1808-1836.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Kocabatmaz, H. (2016). The ideas of pre-service teachers regarding the “flipped classroom model”. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5(4), 14–24. [Google Scholar]
  41. Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology And Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. [Google Scholar]
  42. Koenig, J.A. (2011). Assessing 21st century skills: Summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Research Council. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lai, E.R., & Viering, M. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: ıntegrating research findings. Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  44. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017– 1054. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  45. Ocak, G., & Karakuş, G. (2018a). An investigation of digital literacy self-efficacy skills of pre-service teachers in terms of different variables. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Science, 21(1), 129-147. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Ocak, G., & Karakuş, G. (2018b). Pre-service teachers’ digital literacy self-efficacy scale development. Journal of Kastamonu Education, 26(5), 1427-1436. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  47. Özdemir, M.Ç. (2019). The use of flipped classroom in geometry eaching investigation of the effect of the mathematics teacher candidates on the attitudes of geometry. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Bayburt University, Bayburt. [Google Scholar]
  48. Özdemir, O. (2017). The effects of flipped classroom method in developing written expression skills of Turkish teacher candidates. Unpublished doctorate dissertation. Gazi University, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  49. Özdemir, A., & Şentürk, M.L. (2021). The effect of flipped classroom model on students' academic achievement in science and mathematics education: a meta-analysis study.  i-manager's Journal of Educational Technology, 18(3), 22-41. [Google Scholar]
  50. Özmen, H. (2014). Experimental research methods. M. Metin (Eds) Research methods in education from theory to practice. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  51. Özyurt, H., & Özyurt, Ö. (2018). Analyzing the effects of adapted flipped classroom approach on computer programming success, attitude toward programming, and programming self‐efficacy. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26(6), 2036-2046. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  52. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using spss for windows. Australia: Australian Copyright. [Google Scholar]
  53. Polakova, P., & Klimova, B. (2019). Mobile technology and generation Z in the english language classroom:A preliminary study. Education Sciences, 9(203), 1-11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  54. Pousson, J.M., & Myers, K.A. (2018). Ignatian pedagogy as a frame for universal design in college: Meeting learning needs of generation Z.Education Sciences, 8(93), 1-10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Sarsar, F. (2008). Effects of online collaborative learning environments on social skills of pre-service teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis. Ege University, Izmir. [Google Scholar]
  56. Say, F.S., & Yıldırım, F.S. (2020). Flipped classroom implementation in science teaching. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 7(2), 606-620.  [Google Scholar]
  57. Seçer, İ. (2015). Practical data analysis with SPSS and Lisrel: Analysis and reporting. Ankara: Ani. [Google Scholar]
  58. Sırakaya, D.A. (2017). Student views on gamified flipped classroom model. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 36(1), 114-132. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  59. Slavin R.E. (2015). Cooperative learning in elementary schools.International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education 3-13, 43(1), 5-14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  60. Snyder, C., Besozzi, D., Paska, L., & Oppenlander, J. (2016). Is flipping worth the fuss:A mixed methods case study of screencasting in the social studies classroom. American Secondary Education, 45(1), 28-45. [Google Scholar]
  61. Sosyal, T. (2019). The effect of cooperative learning activities on developing the 21st  century learning and innovation skills in Turkish lessons. Unpublished doctorate disseration. Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu. [Google Scholar]
  62. Springen, K. (2013). Flipped: A revolutionary approach to learning presents pros and Cons for educators. School Library Journal, 59(4), 23-26. [Google Scholar]
  63. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education,Inc. [Google Scholar]
  64. Tao, S.Y., Huang, Y.H., & Tsai, M.J. (2016).Applying the flipped classroom with gamebased learning in elementary school students’ English learning. International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology, 59-63. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  65. Webb, M., & Doman, E. (2020) Impacts of flipped classrooms on learner attitudes towards technology-enhanced language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(3), 240-274. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  66. Yang, C.C.R., & Chen, Y. (2020). Implementing the flipped classroom approach in primary English classrooms in China. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 1217–1235. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  67. Zhang, L. (2018). English flipped classroom teaching model based on cooperative leraning. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(6), 3652-3661. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]