As one variant of the conventional flipped model, online flipped learning is increasingly implemented and it becomes important to explore how learners may be ready for it and how learner readiness may relate to motivation, attitude, and support. Informed by a multidimensional conceptualization of learner readiness and motivation and engagement, this study investigates the current situation of learner readiness, focusing on the moderating roles of learner attitude and environmental support in moderating the interrelationships between learner readiness and motivation and engagement in online flipped learning. Based on survey responses from 6,364 English learners across 11 Chinese universities, the results reveal that the students exhibited a generally high level of readiness for online flipped learning, though with significant demographic differences. The results also indicate that learner attitudes and environmental support moderated the impact of learner readiness upon learner motivation and engagement in online flipped learning. The findings call for attention to examine closely what dimensions of learner readiness could shape what aspects of motivation and engagement rather than simply assuming a linear causal relationship between readiness and motivation and engagement. A potential polarizing effect in online flipped learning is also highlighted, with implications discussed.
AcockA.C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 1012–1028.
2.
AikenL.S.WestS.G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
3.
BunzU.CurryC.VoonW. (2007). Perceived versus actual computer-email-web fluency. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2321–2344.
4.
ByrneB. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
5.
ChoM.-H.ChoY. (2014). Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students’ academic engagement in online learning: Mediating role of perceived online class goal structures. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 25–30.
6.
ChoM.-H.KimB. J. (2013). Students’ self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 17, 69–75.
7.
DeciE.RyanR. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
8.
GreenJ.MartinA.J.MarshH.W. (2007). Motivation and engagement in English, mathematics and science high school subjects: Towards an understanding of multidimensional domain specificity. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 269–279.
9.
HaoY. (2016). Middle school students’ flipped learning readiness in foreign language classrooms: Exploring its relationship with personal characteristics and individual circumstances. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 295–303.
10.
HewK. F.JiaC.GondaD. E.BaiS. (2020). Transitioning to the “new normal” of learning in unpredictable times: pedagogical practices and learning performance in fully online flipped classrooms. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 57.
11.
HungH.-T. (2017a). Design-based research: Redesign of an English language course using a flipped classroom approach. TESOL Quarterly, 51, 180–192.
12.
HungH.-T. (2017b). The integration of a student response system in flipped classrooms. Language Learning & Technology, 21, 16–27.
13.
HungM.-L.ChouC.ChenC.-H.OwnZ.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55, 1080–1090.
14.
JiangL.J.LukJ. (2016). Multimodal composing as a learning activity in English classrooms: Inquiring into the sources of its motivational capacity. System, 59, 1–11.
15.
JiangL.J.ZangN.ZhouN.CaoH. (2021). English teachers’ intention to use flipped teaching: interrelationships with needs satisfaction, motivation, self-efficacy, belief, and support, Computer Assisted Language Learning. Epub ahead of print 22 January 2021. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2020.1846566.
16.
KahuE.R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38, 758–773.
17.
Karaoğlan YılmazF.G.YılmazR. (2020a). The impact of feedback form on transactional distance and critical thinking skills in online discussions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57, 119–130.
18.
Karaoğlan YılmazF.G.YılmazR. (2020b). Learning analytics as a metacognitive tool to influence learner transactional distance and motivation in online learning environments. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Epub ahead of print 20 July 2020. DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2020.1794928
19.
Karaoğlan YılmazF.G.YılmazR. (2020c). Student opinions about personalized recommendation and feedback based on learning analytics. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25, 753–768.
20.
KlineR.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 3rd edition.Guilford.
21.
LaiH.M.HsiaoY.L.HsiehP.J. (2018). The role of motivation, ability, and opportunity in university teachers’ continuance use intention for flipped teaching. Computers & Education, 124, 37–50.
22.
LeeC.YeungA.S.IpT. (2017). University English language learners’ readiness to use computer technology for self-directed learning. System, 67, 99–110.
23.
LinS.H.HuangY.C. (2017). Assessing college student engagement: Development and validation of the student course engagement scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36, 694–708.
24.
MartinA.J. (2007). Examining a multidimensional model of student motivation and engagement using a construct validation approach. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 413–440.
25.
MartinA.J. (2008). Enhancing student motivation and engagement: The effects of a multidimensional intervention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 239–269.
26.
MartinA. (2012). Motivation and engagement: Conceptual, operational, and empirical clarity. In ChristensonS.ReschlyA.WylieC. (Eds.). Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 303–311). Springer.
27.
MastersK.OberprielerG. (2004). Encouraging equitable online participation through curriculum articulation. Computers and Education, 42, 319–332.
28.
MoftakhariM.M. (2013). Evaluating e-learning readiness of faculty of letters of Hacettepe. Unpublished master thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
ParkesM.SteinS.ReadingC. (2015). Student preparedness for university e-learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 1–10.
31.
RoperA. (2007). How students develop online learning skills. Educause Quarterly, 30, 62–64.
32.
StöhrC.DemazièreC.AdawiT. (2020). The polarizing effect of the online flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 147, 103789.
33.
VittaJ.P.Al-HoorieA.H. (2020). The flipped classroom in second language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 24 December 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1362168820981403.
34.
WarnerD.ChristieG.ChoyS. (1998). The readiness of the VET sector for flexible delivery including online learning. Australian National Training Authority.
35.
YangR. (2020). China’s higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Some preliminary observations. Higher Education Research & Development, 39, 1317–1321.
36.
YangJ.YinC.X.WangW. (2018). Flipping the classroom in teaching Chinese as a foreign language. Language Learning & Technology, 22, 16–26.
37.
YılmazR. (2017). Exploring the role of e-learning readiness on student satisfaction and motivation in flipped classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 251–260.
38.
YılmazR. (2020). Enhancing community of inquiry and reflective thinking skills of undergraduates through using learning analytics-based process feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36, 909–921.
39.
YinH. (2018). What motivates Chinese undergraduates to engage in learning? Insights from a psychological approach to student engagement research. Higher Education, 76, 827–847.
40.
YinH.WangW. (2016). Undergraduate students’ motivation and engagement in China: An exploratory study. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41, 601–621.
41.
YuS.JiangL.ZhouN. (2020). The impact of L2 writing instructional approaches on student writing motivation and engagement. Language Teaching Research. 22 Epub ahead of print: September 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1362168820957024.
42.
YurdugülH.DemirÖ. (2017). An investigation of pre-service teachers’ readiness for e-learning at undergraduate level teacher training programs: The case of Hacettepe University. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 32, 896–915.
43.
ZhouX.ChenL.H.ChenR.C. (2017). Measuring student mental readiness for flipped blended learning: Scale development and validation. In Proceedings of the 2017 8th International Conference on Awareness Science and Technology (iCAST) (pp. 161–164). IEEE.
44.
ZouD.XieH. (2019). Flipping an English writing class with technology-enhanced just-in-time teaching and peer instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 27, 1127–1142.
45.
ZouD.LuoS.XieH.HwangG.-J. (2020). A systematic review of research on flipped language classrooms: Theoretical foundations, learning activities, tools, research topics and findings. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Epub ahead of print 13 November 2020. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2020.1839502
