Project-based Flipped Classroom Method in a Cooking Practice Class: A Case Study

Abstract

This study introduces the project-based flipped teaching-learning method into a cooking practice class and analyzes student satisfaction. In the pre-class stage, the professor created a video lecture explaining the practice dish’s ingredients and cooking methods, and uploaded it to the Learning Management System. After watching the video, during the in-class stage, learners practiced in teams, with the professor providing feedback on cooking processes. In the post-class stage, learners presented the cooking process of the completed dish, and received further feedback. A satisfaction survey involving 19 of 21 students indicated positive ratings for focus in class, online–offline course balance, professor–student interaction, and convenience of video lectures. However, learners indicated difficulty in understanding the cooking method and process owing to the lack of demonstration by the professor during the pre-class stage. Therefore, an efficient teaching and learning method for cooking practice education that can maximize these advantages should be designed.

Plain language summary

A case study on the project-based flipped classroom in cooking classes

This study explored a new way of teaching a cooking class using a project-based flipped classroom approach. Before class, students watched a video made by the professor explaining the dish’s ingredients and cooking steps. During class, students worked in teams to cook, while the professor gave feedback. After class, they presented their finished dishes and received more feedback. A survey of 19 students showed they liked the class’s balance between online and in-person work, the interaction with the professor, and the convenience of the video lectures. However, some students found it hard to understand the cooking process without a live demonstration from the professor. More effective methods for teaching cooking practice should be developed.

Keywords

cooking practice class flipped teaching-learning method instructional design model project-based learning satisfaction level

Introduction

With the recent spread of content featuring star chefs across various media, the social perception of chef jobs in Korea have shifted from that of physical labor for low-educated people to jobs that require professional skills (O. S. Kim, 2021; J. E. Kim et al., 2016). Accordingly, many higher education institutions have introduced majors related to cooking (Yang & Koo, 2019). Culinary education in university generally combines theoretical and practical instruction to provide knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to work in the culinary department of the hospitality industry. In particular, as cooking practice education to cultivate professional cooking skills and knowledge is central to cooking education, systematic teaching and learning methods of cooking practice education are very important.

Compared to other occupations, cooking is a representative occupation in which the apprenticeship-style organizational culture remains strong because the hierarchy is very strict (Moon et al., 2021). Influenced by this traditional organizational culture of apprenticeship, training in culinary practice at universities is generally conducted as an apprenticeship, with instructors demonstrating and students practicing (H. J. Kim & Kim, 2020). Apprenticeship cooking practice education is not only useful for efficiently transferring and acquiring a large amount of knowledge and skills in a short period (Um, 2016), but also for developing an identity and value as a professional (S. G. Kim, 2010). However, this educational method may not fit the recent educational trend, which requires a shift away from the lecture-oriented education of instructors to learner-centered education that fosters critical thinking, collaboration, and communication skills required by a rapidly changing society (O. S. Kim, 2020; A. K. Kim & Davies, 2014; H. Lim & Lee, 2019). Moreover, studies (Mahfud et al., 2019; Marinakou & Giousmpasoglou, 2022; Moon et al., 2021) examining the core competencies required of chefs have found that creativity and esthetics, among other core competences, are important. However, inferring from studies (Boo et al., 2017; Y. Kim et al., 2022) showing that apprenticeship training does not enhance learners’ creativity, it may be an inappropriate teaching and learning method to enhance the creativity required for chefs. In other words, teaching and learning methods that promote creativity by encouraging collaboration among learners and self-directed cooking should be used in the training of chefs at universities—the main training centers for chefs.

Moreover, owing to the unexpected outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020, attempts have been made to apply various teaching and learning methods to culinary arts education in universities. Among them, the flipped classroom (FC) teaching and learning method, a form of pedagogy derived from the rapid growth of technology, is an innovative teaching method actively utilized in blended learning, which combines online and offline learning (Chiou et al., 2020; Jang, 2021). To achieve learner-led education in culinary practice through the application of FC, systematic instructional design is required in many respects, including the selection of learning tasks and activities, the application of instructional models, the organization of the learning environment, timely guidance from instructors, and the connection between online and offline activities (Choi & Chae, 2021; Techanamurthy et al., 2020). However, despite the rapid growth of FC applied to culinary arts education, few studies have provided a clear framework for organically linking online and offline learning activities and the implementation strategies that should be used.

Additionally, for successful FC, learner-driven tasks must be carried out seamlessly in a face-to-face classroom setting (Strayer, 2016). In this regard, various teaching and learning methods have been discussed when it comes to effectively implementing offline classroom activities for FC. Among these, project-based flipped classrooms (PBFC) have recently attracted attention (Koh, 2021; Listiqowati et al., 2022; Techanamurthy et al., 2020). This approach incorporates PBL to improve the effectiveness of FC using digital technology. In this way, combining the advantages of PBL, which can approach cooking practice education in a self-directed manner, will achieve a better educational effect in FC-based cooking practice education.

The research problem addressed in this study is the need for an effective instructional design that fosters creativity, self-directed learning, and collaboration in culinary education, which current apprenticeship methods may not sufficiently support. To address this problem, the current study explores how integrating PBL and FC can enhance these critical competencies in culinary education. Accordingly, the present study aims to analyze learners’ satisfaction and interest in this instructional design model and provide practical guidelines for instructors who wish to introduce this teaching and learning method into culinary practice education.

Theoretical Background

General Teaching and Learning Method for Cooking Practice

In general, universities apply demonstration practice teaching and learning methods to their cooking practices, as shown in Figure 1. The first step is the class preparation stage, in which the instructor selects the menu to be practiced during the practical class. The instructor should prepare the necessary ingredients and learning materials, such as recipes and dishes. The second step is a demonstration step in which instructors demonstrate, to the learners, the overall cooking process, including systematic knowledge or skills related to the menu to be practiced. Instructors should check whether all learners can accurately observe a demonstration and identify their reactions, problems, and improvements during the demonstration. The third step is the practical stage, in which the learner completes the task observed in the demonstration stage. At this stage, learners acquire the same skills and knowledge as instructors by preparing dishes. Additionally, instructors should provide time and conditions for learners to practice sufficiently and independently, alongside offering feedback on the cooking process during the practice process. Finally, the fourth step involves evaluation and cleanup. At this stage, instructors provide feedback on the finished dishes to motivate learners and improve their sense of accomplishment. Additionally, the learner tests the finished dish, cleans the kitchen, and ends the cooking class.

Figure 1.

Steps in teaching and learning method for cooking practice.

This demonstration and practice method directly illustrates the dish preparation process to be practiced, and the learner can practice it immediately after the demonstration, which allows for immediate feedback; thus, the learning effect is significant. However, if learners cannot observe the dish preparation process during the demonstration phase, they cannot prepare the dish correctly during the practice phase. Additionally, owing to the limited time and space, it is difficult for instructors to conduct multiple demonstrations to reduce the learning effects that occur due to the different levels of learners. In this respect, the current study introduces a FC teaching and learning method for cooking practice education.

The Flipped Classroom Method

Concepts and Procedures of the Flipped Classroom

FC is a teaching and learning method that encourages learners to acquire knowledge and information through online content, such as video lectures, before attending a face-to-face class and then participating in a face-to-face class with learner-centered activities, such as discussions and exercises (Gündüz & Akkoyunlu, 2020; O. S. Kim, 2020). The learner-centered FC is attracting attention as a teaching and learning method that can enhance learners’ ability to create, recreate, integrate, and develop the knowledge they need, rather than simply transferring and memorizing knowledge (Cheong, 2020).

The process of introducing FC varies depending on the professor, students, and course content; however, in general, the basic design framework of the class consists of a pre-class stage, an in-class stage, and a post-class stage, as shown in Figure 2 (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). In the pre-class stage, the instructor provides the content that the learners need to learn in the in-class stage online in advance (H. W. Shin, 2018a) and checks the learners’ learning content through assignments, such as creating study notes and taking quizzes. Learners pre-learn the online content through a variety of media. In the face-to-face phase, the instructor reviews what was learned in the pre-course phase and provides feedback on learning activities such as discussions and exercises. Based on what they learned in the pre-class stage, learners participate in student-centered, in-depth learning activities such as discussions, debates, inquiry, project learning, cooperative learning, and role-playing. In the post-class stage, the instructor evaluates the results of the in-class learning activities, provides feedback, and guides future learning activities. Learners present and reflect on the results of in-class learning activities (C. W. Nam & Shin, 2019; S. H. Park & Park, 2022; H. W. Shin, 2018a). In this study, we attempted to apply these three stages to cooking practice education; the specific instructional design system is presented in the methods section.

Figure 2.

Procedures of flipped classroom.

Effectiveness of the Flipped Classroom

In a meta-analysis of 95 Korean studies on FC, Cho and Lee (2018) found that FC was more effective than traditional lecture-based classes in increasing learner engagement and interaction and improving creativity, critical thinking, and self-efficacy. However, the effectiveness of FC has been criticized, with some studies reporting lower (Yeo et al., 2015) or no difference (H. S. Lee et al., 2015; H. Lim & Lee, 2019) in satisfaction or learning outcomes compared with lecture-based classes. Moreover, some studies have analyzed the effectiveness of FC for culinary arts majors. Techanamurthy et al. (2020), who studied readiness for FC among culinary students at a community college in Malaysia, found that most students were unaware of FC and that there was no significant difference in readiness to implement FC according to gender. Holik (2016), who focused on students at a secondary school in the United States, discovered that students who participated in an FC-enhanced culinary arts class were more engaged in the class than were students who participated in a traditional technical culinary arts class. Choi and Chae (2021) studied Korean college students majoring in culinary arts who had experienced a cooking lab class with FC and reported positive effects on learning realism, engagement, achievement, and transfer. S. H. Shin and Lee (2021) assessed the application of FC in a cooking lab course using YouTube and found that FC positively affected students’ interest in class and increased confidence. These studies are of great importance in analyzing FC’ impact on culinary education, but they are limited in that they do not present specific methods or procedures for applying FC to culinary education.

Additionally, the learning outcomes of FC may vary depending on participants’ characteristics. J. M. Nam (2022), who studied English education majors at a 4-year liberal arts college, found no difference in the perception of and satisfaction with FC based on gender or academic level. Conversely, students with higher grades were more likely to be satisfied with FC than those with lower grades. In a study on college students at a 4-year university, Son et al. (2015) found that FC had a positive effect on learning motivation, but there were no gender differences. In contrast, J. Lim (2018) found that female students perceived the usefulness of FC to be higher than did male students, but there was no difference in their perceptions of and satisfaction with FC based on their end-of-semester grades. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze how student satisfaction with cooking classes using FC differs by gender and academic level. Thus, So (2022) found that the more students were engaged in continuous career exploration and preparation to reach their career goals, the more positively they participated in their major classes. Additionally, previous studies (Ju, 2020; J. H. Shin, 2018b) analyzing the relationship between FC and career-related variables reported that, after taking a course with FC, students’ career preparation behavior and career attitude maturity improved compared to before taking the course. These findings suggest that the educational performance of culinary arts students who use FC might vary according to their professional maturity or that it might positively impact their careers.

Project-Based Flipped Classroom

Based on the results of previous studies, FC attracts attention in education as a new alternative to overcome the limitations of existing education. However, it is difficult to conduct classroom teaching as students need to watch the videos in advance, there is reduced student–teacher interaction outside the classroom, and low attendance rates can hinder FC’s effectiveness (Taşpolat et al., 2021). Resultantly, classroom teaching is not as active as intended in terms of interaction, discussion, and practice (Cheong & Kwak, 2018; E. Lee et al., 2018; Shyr & Chen, 2018). PBFC is a teaching and learning method in which learners learn online outside the classroom through lecture-style instructional videos and then work with other learners in the classroom to complete the final product associated with the project based on the prior knowledge they have acquired (K. H. Lee, 2020; E. Lee et al., 2018). The rationale for combining PBL with FC is to maximize the former’s strengths, which make it possible to compensate for the problems and limitations of FC, increasing learner engagement in prior learning and enabling learners to engage in self-directed classroom discussions and exercises (E. Lee et al., 2018; Leem, 2016; J. M. Park & Chung, 2021; Strayer, 2016). These PBFCs are designed in different ways depending on the instructor and nature of the project (Hwang et al., 2015; M. K. Kim et al., 2014). Generally, the instructor provides the prior knowledge required for project activities through videos, and learners confer with classmates before class to plan future project activities and gather relevant materials. After gathering data and planning, learners participate in class to develop project outcomes through discussion and hands-on activities. This includes presentations and evaluations of project outcomes (instructor evaluation, team evaluation, peer evaluation, and self-evaluation) as well as reflection activities.

In what follows, certain findings from these PBFC-related studies are summarized. Techanamurthy et al. (2020) found that students improved their learning and problem-solving skills after using a problem-solving flipped classroom module. Chua and Islam (2021), who studied engineering majors at a university in Singapore, discovered that students in a hybrid PBL-flipped classroom increased their fundamental formative knowledge and improved their problem-solving abilities compared to students in a traditional PBL class. Listiqowati et al. (2022) studied university students who took a PBFC-enhanced Geography Education Research Methods course at an Indonesian university, finding that this teaching and learning method developed their critical thinking skills. A study of university students in South Korea also found that PBFC positively affected students’ satisfaction with classes and improved their interaction and communication skills (Koh, 2021; K. H. Lee, 2020). Therefore, this study aimed to apply FC with PBL to culinary education to improve the connection between online and offline courses, which has been identified as a problem of FC.

Research Methods and Teaching Systems Development

Research Method

This study aimed to present a model for instructional design, strategy, and pedagogical performance for culinary practice education through the integration of PBL and FC. To this end, the study applied the Analysis Design Development Implementation Evaluation (ADDIE) Model, which has been used in many educational content development studies as a general model of Institutional Systems Development (S. T. Kim & Lee, 2021; J. Lee & Park, 2016). The research method and schedule for each step are shown in Table 1. Additionally, before executing the program developed in this study, four experts on program design and development content verified its content validity. First, the validity of the model and strategy for culinary education was tested by presenting the PBFC to two professors majoring in education. The two college cooking professors verified that the YouTube video content to be provided to students prior to class matched the cooking process of the dish to be practiced.

Table 1.

Procedure and Schedule of the ADDIE Model.

Procedure	Research method	Schedule
Analysis	Needs analysis of learners	2021.12–2022.01
Analysis	Analysis of the learning environment and learners	2021.12–2022.01
Design	Program objectives	2022.01–2022.02
	Selection of class content
	Establishment of class activity strategies for each stage
Development	Development of teaching materials and tools	2022.02–2022.03
Development	Development of program schematics	2022.02–2022.03
Implementation	Team composition and roles	2022.03–2022.06
Implementation	Implementation of the program	2022.03–2022.06
Evaluation	Selection of program evaluation method	2022.06–2022.11
	Evaluation of class implementation process and educational performance
	Modification and supplementation of the program

Development of Teaching System by the ADDIE Model

Analysis Phase

Needs Analysis of Learner

To understand the educational needs of learners, this study used the curriculum satisfaction evaluation conducted in the first semester of 2021, and the results are shown in Table 2. It was found that college students majoring in cooking perceived the educational satisfaction of practical subjects to be higher than that of theoretical subjects. Specifically, the positive response rate for the course which revolved around learning about pre-processing, cooking, and plating of meat, fish, and shellfish was 85.6%—the lowest among the practice courses. These results suggest the need to develop a differentiated strategy to improve professional skills that graduates can immediately use in the industry upon graduation when the course reopens.

Table 2.

The Degree of Student Satisfaction with the Subjects in the Curriculum Offered During the First Semester of 2021.

Subjects	Positive response ratio	Negative response ratio	Points
Subjects	Positive response ratio	Negative response ratio	5	4	3	2	1
Theoretical subject
1. Professional cooking terminology	95.7	0.7	91 (65.0)	43 (30.7)	5 (3.6)		1 (0.7)
2. Understanding confectionery bread	95	0.7	104 (74.3)	29 (20.7)	6 (4.3)		1 (0.7)
3. Purchase and material management	87.2	1.1	114 (63.3)	43 (23.9)	21 (11.7)	2 (1.1)
4. Food and cooking science	85.6	0.6	106 (66.3)	31 (19.4)	22 (13.8)	1 (0.6)
5. Restaurant management	83.2	0	100 (54.1)	54 (29.2)	31 (16.8)
Practical subject
1. Basic baking	97.1	0.7	106 (75.7)	30 (21.4)	3 (2.1)		1 (0.7)
2. Basic Korean cuisine	97.1	0.7	112 (80.0)	24 (17.1)	3 (2.1)		1 (0.7)
3. Stocks, sauces, and soups	96.6	0.7	103 (71.0)	37 (25.5)	4 (2.8)		1 (0.7)
4. Coffee barista	88.3	1.1	123 (68.3)	36 (20.0)	19 (10.6)	2 (1.1)
5. Advanced pastry	87.8	0	128 (71.1)	30 (16.7)	22 (12.2)
6. Japanese cuisine	87	1.6	133 (71.9)	28 (15.1)	21 (11.4)	3 (1.6)
7. Seafood and meat-based cuisines	85.6	0.6	124 (68.9)	30 (16.7)	25 (13.9)	1 (0.6)
Total	89.9	0.8	1,344 (68.7)	415 (21.2)	182 (9.3)	9 (0.5)	5 (0.3)

Note. 1 = Very dissatisfied, 2 = Dissatisfied, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Satisfied, 5 = Very satisfied. The positive response rate is the percentage sum of scores 4 and 5, while the negative response rate is the percentage sum of scores 1 and 2.

Analysis of the Learning Environment and Learners

This study applied PBFC to cooking practice courses introduced in the second grade. Sophomores majoring in cooking acquire basic cooking knowledge and skills by taking courses such as stock, sauce, and appetizer cooking in the first year. However, since most of the first-year cooking courses were conducted with the demonstration method, the cooking courses introduced in the second year needed to introduce a new teaching and learning method that enabled learners to participate in cooking education independently. Additionally, University D was equipped with an Learning Management System (LMS) so that teachers and learners could load or download the materials needed for online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second graders are accustomed to taking interactive online lessons in real time through the LMS or online lessons through recorded lecture videos using various devices in the first year.

Design Phase

Program Objectives and Selection of Class Content

In this study, PBFC was applied to the “Meat, Fish, and Shellfish Cooking” course, which had the lowest positive response rate in the evaluation of the educational satisfaction of students. This course is designed based on Korea’s National Competency Standard (NCS), which standardizes the ability (knowledge, skills, and attitude) required to perform duties in industrial sites. Based on the content presented by the NCS, the objective of this course is to provide knowledge, skills, and attitudes related to preparing ingredients, cooking, and plating Western-style main dishes containing meat, fish, and shellfish. To achieve these objectives, the researcher selected five learning tasks from the “Cooking Industry Engineer”—a qualification test conducted by the Human Resources Development Service of Korea—as practice items; the content is shown in Table 3.

Table 3.

Five Learning Tasks of the Cooking Industry Engineer.

Dish	Exam time (min)	Number of materials	Key requirements
Chicken roulade with tomato coulis	80	24	Cooking chicken roulade with mushroom Duxelles, tomato coulis, glazed apples, and Dutch potatoes
Roasted rack of lamb with thyme sauce	90	21	Cooking roasted lamb chops with mustard crust, thyme sauce, Anna potato, sautéed asparagus, and roasted garlic
Duck breast with bigarade sauce	80	24	Cooking roasted duck breast with honey, bigarade sauce, rosti potato, sautéed broccoli, glazed carrots, and pear confit
Beef filet steak with anchovy butter	80	24	Cooking beef tenderloin steak with anchovy butter on top, red wine sauce, Dauphinoise potato, and glazed carrot, etc.
Oil poached red snapper with thyme velouté	90	22	Cooking red snapper poached in oil, thyme velouté sauce, fondant potatoes, and ratatouille

Class Activity Strategies for Each Stage

Pre-Class Stage

In this stage, the instructor uploaded a video lasting approximately 30 min on the ingredients, recipes, and requirements necessary to complete one of the five learning tasks presented in Table 3. Additionally, it was felt that the video of the teacher’s cooking demonstration might interfere with the benefits of PBL, where students take the lead in learning. Therefore, the video of the instructor’s cooking demonstration was excluded. However, to complete the learning tasks in PBFC, learners need to deepen their knowledge by using various resources in the pre-teaching phase (Hebaishi, 2018). In particular, flipped learning, recently conducted using YouTube data, has been reported to be effective in improving the educational effects on learners (Ahn, 2016; Jang, 2021). Therefore, this study did not provide a demonstration video to review the cooking process of the dish to be practiced, but instead provided YouTube links along with the instructor’s video lecture in the LMS lecture room. Learners watched the instructor’s uploaded video and YouTube videos, and participated in the offline class.

In-Class Stage

In this stage, learners practiced one of the five learning tasks presented in Table 4. Using a strategy to link the learning activities in the pre-class stage and the in-class stage, instructors additionally explained difficult-to-understand cooking methods and answered learners’ questions for approximately 20 min prior to learners’ cooking practice. At the end of these mini-lectures, learners practiced as a team based on the division of roles and submitted their finished dish. The instructor observed the learners’ cooking exercises and gave them feedback.

Table 4.

Lecture Plans and YouTube Videos for Each Week.

Week	Learning content and YouTube videos
1	Course orientation		1. Understanding flip learning and role performance among team members
			2. Understanding the components of Western-style main dishes
			3. Understanding the qualifications (Industrial Engineer Cook, Western Food)
2, 9	Chicken roulade with tomato coulis	Protein	https://youtu.be/cIsPZgnPo58, https://youtu.be/okrHqa_wewY, https://youtu.be/ovUN6v7F0rs, https://youtu.be/rFIwbUBiRSE
		Sauce	https://youtu.be/A14WPA-Uu-U
		Starch	https://youtu.be/HX76kycYzdw
		Vegetable	https://youtu.be/X9q9eead4uw
3, 10	Roasted rack of lamb with thyme sauce	Protein	https://youtu.be/mcSugD-uNKM, https://youtu.be/z2kKv1gKBww
		Sauce	https://youtu.be/cR0tRS-iqDs, https://youtu.be/3Zl2WrWf0to
		Starch	https://youtu.be/hP51nIsyWJM
		Vegetable	None
4, 11	Duck breast with bigarade sauce	Protein	https://youtu.be/KLqpVgq_YWA, https://youtu.be/L7YEAADV0Yk,
		Protein	https://youtu.be/Vl8xrVixU1Q, https://youtu.be/UgOQMja3q1Q
		Sauce	https://youtu.be/hsbdU0zZn-0, https://youtu.be/LjZPyXFDRS0, https://youtu.be/WE46pg5-a1M, https://youtu.be/zC3DicG-OxA
		Starch	https://youtu.be/JvyoPf3cL9Y, https://youtu.be/1_V3FMvaggs, https://youtu.be/qza-pyP9quI
		Vegetable	https://youtu.be/uUYSPi8J9HM, https://youtu.be/K_Nz_ahS4ag, https://youtu.be/n2TaKCnuGO0, https://youtu.be/OWr4kDoYNsQ, https://youtu.be/-9O9-u-Qttk, https://youtu.be/fS1_FC2jihw
5, 12	Beef filet steak with anchovy butter	Protein	https://youtu.be/AmC9SmCBUj4, https://youtu.be/L308WvMn3f0, https://youtu.be/UFBkj0ZNw7Q, https://youtu.be/z2J_lLadj8U
		Sauce	https://youtu.be/HZwk9078BBw, https://youtu.be/0HIcQ9rvOQE
		Starch	https://youtu.be/fWwoYmhaUB4, https://youtu.be/zJUEIvEdq0Y, https://youtu.be/e6Q4RZ16aog, https://youtu.be/gfdXso-74gA
		Vegetable	None
6, 13	Oil poached red snapper with thyme velouté	Protein	https://youtu.be/sTqhSdHBBPE, https://youtu.be/URNo7Af1FxE, https://youtu.be/yfBReYNuhqE, https://youtu.be/v7yAZ9P0kdI, https://youtu.be/OM9atoRn9Rg
		Sauce	https://youtu.be/W1pUlqjYdZM, https://youtu.be/5AByEmmshjE, https://youtu.be/hk63jx2O2x0
		Starch	https://youtu.be/XOatJPocjDo, https://youtu.be/vmvduaJ0dtc, https://youtu.be/omMU2Mh1KPw, https://youtu.be/CYQpoklVagQ
		Vegetable	https://youtu.be/NTPic7MwZ78, https://youtu.be/e6erfy2bURg
7, 14	Seafood papillote		https://youtu.be/D-xOq54mvV4, https://youtu.be/9AwzHWc0L1A, https://youtu.be/hx3tFxl99Cw
7, 14	Salt crusted chicken		https://youtu.be/B7Cum3t-SWE, https://youtu.be/S1C5rEGOpQ8, https://youtu.be/P9gj4pPqHpA, https://youtu.be/IvsOXwGBYWg
8, 15	Midterm and final exams

Post-Class Stage

In this stage, learners presented the division of roles by team and the cooking process for the completed dish. The instructor evaluated the finished dish for each team, provided feedback, and announced the content for the next lesson. At the end of this process, learners sampled the practiced dish, cleaned up the practice room, and finished the class. Additionally, learners were encouraged to reflect on their learning activities in each project learning process (E. Lee et al., 2018). To this end, after the cooking exercise, learners were asked to submit a recipe that included the ingredients and the process of preparing the dish they practiced in the LMS. The instructor reflected on this during the midterm exam.

Development Phase

Development of Teaching Materials and Tools

As mentioned earlier, the instructor aimed to provide a YouTube video link on LMS. Therefore, during the development phase, the instructor searched for a YouTube video where the cooking process for the five learning tasks could be viewed. Additionally, the validity was checked by two college professors with more than 10 years’ experience in the field to determine whether the recipes from these YouTube videos matched the recipes required in the certification exam and whether they were useful for online pre-learning by learners.

Development of the Program Plan

Figure 3 shows the teaching and learning model using PBFL.

Figure 3.

PBFL teaching and learning model for culinary practice education.

Implementation Phase

Team Composition and Roles

The team for the cooking exercises was composed of three to four people, considering the components of Western main dishes—which are divided into five elements: protein, starch, vegetables, sauce, plate layout, and decoration (D. K. Lee et al., 2010)—as well as the environment and the number of students in the cooking exercise room.

Consequently, two teams of three students and four teams of four students were formed. Additionally, as shown in Figure 4, the five components of Western main dishes were reduced to three. In the four-person team, three roles were assigned, and two learners shared one role, considering the team members’ cooking abilities and learner absences. In addition, learners changed roles weekly to participate in the exercise.

Figure 4.

Team composition and roles for PBFL.

Implementation of the Program

In the first semester of 2022, the “Practice of Fish, Shellfish, and Meat Cooking” course (fourcredits) was offered in the second year of the culinary major at D University. This course conducted cooking practice classes by applying PBFC for 12 weeks, excluding the first-week classes, midterms, and final exams. The content of each lecture and related YouTube videos for pre-learning are shown in Table 4. From the second to the sixth week, cooking practice classes applied PBFC to five learning tasks. Similarly, from the 9th to the 13th week, the same five tasks were repeated. Cooking exercises in the 7th and 14th weeks also used PBFC but focused on different tasks.

Evaluation Phase

Survey Subjects

A survey was planned for the 22 students enrolled in the “Practice of Fish, Shellfish, and Meat Cooking” course following the final exam to evaluate the satisfaction and effectiveness of the PBFC teaching method. The survey was conducted on June 20, 2022 following the final exam. Prior to administering the survey, verbal consent was obtained from all participants except two students who were absent. Consequently, 19 respondents completed the survey.

Program Evaluation and Analysis Method

To measure class satisfaction and interest in the teaching and learning method using PBFC, this study modified and supplemented the measurement tools used by Seo and Suh (2019) and Yoon (2020). The measurement tool for class satisfaction comprised four questions on class concentration, six questions on the association between online and offline classes, three questions on the interaction between professors and students, and three questions on the ease of use of video learning. All 24 items in the instrument were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Additionally, six items were used to determine the general status of prior online learning activities for PBFC, and demographic characteristics of survey respondents were determined using gender, school grades, and career choices. Finally, through open-ended questions, we sought to understand the advantages and disadvantages of students’ thoughts regarding culinary education through the use of PBFC.

SPSS software (version 18.0) was used to statistically analyze the survey results. First, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was confirmed to check the reliability of the five subfactors of class satisfaction. Second, frequency and descriptive statistical analyses were conducted to confirm the overall information pertaining to the sub-variables of class satisfaction. Third, since the number of participants in the survey was small (n < 30), a normality test using the Shapiro-Wilk test was first conducted. If the statistic of the normality test was not significant, an independent sample t-test was conducted, and if the statistic of the normality test was significant, the Mann-Whitney test, a non-parametric method, was performed.

Results

Demographic Characteristics

In terms of the survey participants’ demographic characteristics, when it came to gender, 14 were male and 5 were female. Regarding first-year grade point average, nine students (47.4%) had a grade point average of 3.5 to 4.0, five students (26.3%) had a grade point average of 3.0 to 3.5, four students (21.1%) had a grade point average of 4.0 to 4.5, and one student (5.3%) had a grade point average of less than 3.0. Additionally, 12 students (63.2%) planned to find a job in their major after graduation and 7 students (36.8%) indicated they were considering a job in their major.

Prior Learning Activity

Table 5 shows the results of preliminary online learning for cooking practice training with PBFC. Nine (47.4%) students watched two lecture videos per week, six (31.6%) watched one video, and three (15.8%) watched three or more videos. When asked how much time they spent online, 12 (63.2%) indicated they watched between 10 and 30 min per week, while 5 (26.3%) watched more than 30 minutes. Regarding the device they used to watch lecture videos, 12 students (63.2%) reported using a PC, 7 students (36.8%) used a smartphone, and 16 students (84.1%) watched lecture videos mainly at home. When asked why they were not willing to take the online preparation course for other culinary arts courses in the future, 10 students (52.6%) said they would better understand the professor’s demonstration method for culinary arts courses. In contrast, eight (42.1%) students stated they would be willing to take a course with PBFC in the future because the pre-course videos had a high learning effect, and five (26.3%) said they would be willing to take a course with PBFC in the future because they could learn repeatedly, which improved learning comprehension.

Table 5.

Current Status of Pre-learning Activities.

Items		n (%)
Number of times the pre-learning video was watched	None	1 (5.2)
	1	6 (31.6)
	2	9 (47.4)
	3 and above	3 (15.8)
Time spent watching the pre-learning video (minutes)	Less than 10	2 (10.5)
	10–20	6 (31.6)
	20–30	6 (31.6)
	More than 30	5 (26.3)
Device used to watch the pre-learning video	PC	12 (63.2)
Device used to watch the pre-learning video	Smart phone	7 (36.8)
Place where you watched the pre-learning video	Home	16 (84.1)
	Public transport	1 (5.3)
	Internet cafe	1 (5.3)
	Other	1 (5.3)
The reason why you are not willing to apply for courses that apply flipped learning in the future	The time required for pre-learning is burdensome	1 (5.3)
	Demonstration practice teaching and learning methods are better understood	10 (52.6)
	There are so many things to study	1 (5.3)
	The pre-learning video reduces learning understanding	2 (10.5)
	Activities such as discussion and practice are burdensome	2 (10.5)
	No response	3 (15.8)
The reason why you are willing to apply for courses that apply flipped learning in the future	The pre-learning effect of the pre-lecture video	8 (42.1)
	Promote learning understanding through repetitive learning	5 (26.3)
	Active interaction with the professor	1 (5.3)
	Increased interaction among students	1 (5.3)
	Classes that are not boring	4 (21.0)
Total		19 (100.0)

Satisfaction and Interest in Cooking Practice Training with PBFC

Table 6 shows the results of the analysis of satisfaction and interest in the PBFC-adapted cooking class. The measurement tool is considered reliable, as the lowest Cronbach’s alpha coefficient among the five factors was .691.

Table 6.

Satisfaction of Cooking Practice Class Applying PBFC.

	Frequency					Mean ± SD
Items	1	2	3	4	5	Mean ± SD
Factor 1: The relationship between online and offline classes (Cronbach’s alpha = .888)
There was a relationship between video lectures and in-class activities			3 (15.8)	5 (26.3)	11 (57.9)	4.42 ± 0.77
The video lectures helped me achieve the objectives of the classes			2 (10.5)	5 (26.3)	12 (63.2)	4.53 ± 0.70
Video lectures were effective for pre-learning			1 (5.3)	5 (26.3)	13 (68.4)	4.63 ± 0.60
Before class, I watched a video lecture			3 (15.8)	6 (31.6)	10 (52.6)	4.37 ± 0.76
The video lectures before class helped me understand the content of the subject				7 (36.8)	12 (63.2)	4.63 ± 0.50
Through activity-oriented flip learning, I was able to understand the nature and content of the subject well			1 (5.3)	11 (57.9)	7 (36.8)	4.32 ± 0.58
Total			10 (8.8)	39 (34.2)	65 (57.0)	4.48 ± 0.53
Factor 2: The degree of concentration in the class (Cronbach’s alpha = .764)
Flipped learning was effective in increasing interest in this class				15 (78.9)	4 (21.1)	4.21 ± 0.42
Flipped learning was effective in increasing concentration in this class			1 (5.2)	9 (47.4)	9 (47.4)	4.42 ± 0.61
Various task activities through flip learning increased interest in this class			3 (15.8)	10 (52.6)	6 (31.6)	4.16 ± 0.69
I actively participated in activities with my fellow students			1 (5.3)	6 (31.6)	12 (63.1)	4.58 ± 0.61
Total			5 (6.6)	40 (52.6)	31 (40.8)	4.34 ± 0.45
Factor 3: Interaction between professor and students (Cronbach’s alpha = .691)
Interaction between professor and students was active during class			4 (21.1)	6 (31.6)	9 (47.4)	4.26 ± 0.806
Students’ participation activities during class were beneficial in understanding the subject content			3 (15.8)	7 (36.8)	9 (47.4)	4.32 ± 0.749
Professor’s lectures decreased, so students’ activities increased during class			6 (31.6)	7 (36.8)	6 (31.6)	4.00 ± 0.816
Total			13 (22.8)	20 (35.1)	24 (42.1)	4.19 ± 0.62
Factor 4: The convenience of video lectures (Cronbach’s alpha = .702)
There was no difficulty in watching the video lecture		1 (5.2)	4 (21.1)	4 (21.1)	10 (52.6)	4.21 ± 1.00
Video learning was convenient for repetitive learning			2 (10.5)	8 (42.1)	9 (47.4)	4.37 ± 0.68
Video learning was convenient to watch at the time I wanted			1 (5.3)	6 (31.6)	12 (63.1)	4.58 ± 0.61
Total		1 (1.7)	7 (12.3)	18 (31.6)	31 (54.4)	4.39 ± 0.61
Factor 5: Interest in flip learning teaching and learning methods (Cronbach’s alpha = .919)
I want to continue the cooking practice class with flipped learning			5 (26.3)	5 (26.3)	9 (47.4)	4.21 ± 0.86
Flipped learning seems to improve grades in a cooking practice class		1 (5.3)	9 (47.4)	5 (26.3)	4 (21.0)	3.63 ± 0.90
Classes with flipped learning are more fun than regular classes		1 (5.2)	9 (47.4)	6 (31.6)	3 (15.8)	3.58 ± 0.84
Flipped learning classes make students understand the content of the classes better than regular classes			9 (47.4)	6 (31.6)	4 (21.0)	3.74 ± 0.81
Overall, I am satisfied with the class applying flipped learning			6 (31.6)	8 (42.1)	5 (26.3)	3.95 ± 0.78
Flipped learning has increased interest in the class			7 (36.8)	8 (42.1)	4 (21.1)	3.84 ± 0.77
I want to choose a class that applies flipped learning in the future			10 (52.6)	2 (10.5)	7 (36.9)	3.84 ± 0.96
I would recommend classes that apply flipped learning to other students		1 (5.3)	7 (36.8)	7 (36.8)	4 (21.1)	3.74 ± 0.87
Total		3 (2.0)	62 (40.8)	47 (30.9)	40 (26.3)	3.82 ± 0.68

First, a total of 104 students (91.2%) rated the relevance of the online and offline courses as 4 or 5. They found the video course useful as a prerequisite for practicing the learning tasks and very relevant to the offline cooking course to help them complete the tasks.

Second, regarding satisfaction with the concentration of the cooking lab class using PBFC, a total of 71 cases (93.4%) were distributed between 4 and 5. In particular, the mean for the statement “I actively participated in activities with fellow students” was 4.58, indicating that the interaction with my fellow students improved during the cooking lab class using PBFC, leading to active participation.

Third, students’ satisfaction with the interactivity between professors and students ranged from 4 to 5 in 44 cases (77.2%), indicating that PBFC in culinary arts education increased the interaction between professors and students and helped them understand the content of the activities in class.

Fourth, students’ satisfaction with the ease of use of video learning was distributed between 4 and 5, with a total of 49 (86.0%), indicating that students did not have much difficulty using video learning for preliminary learning in the PBFC-adapted cooking lab training and that students could repeatedly learn at their convenience. We believe this result is related to COVID-19 having made it easier for learners to use pre-learning through LMS or various internet media environments.

Fifth, regarding interest in this teaching and learning method, 87 (57.2%) of the students’ responses were between 4 and 5, and 65 (42.8%) were between 2 and 3, with an overall mean of 3.82. This result is thought to be due to majors being more familiar with the cooking practice demonstration method and students having difficulty with the learning volume, procedures, etc., of PBFC.

Course Satisfaction and Interest by Students’ Personal Characteristics

Before analyzing the differences in course satisfaction and interest according to students’ personal characteristics, we performed the Shapiro-Wilk test—a normality test designed to determine whether the population has a normal distribution. According to the analysis results in Table 7, the factors interaction, ease of use, and interest in the course were normally distributed according to personal characteristics (p > .05); therefore, an independent samples t-test was performed. However, the factors concentration and class relevance were not normally distributed (p < .05); therefore, a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was performed for independent samples.

Table 7.

The Differences in Course Satisfaction and Interest of PBFC According to Students’ Personal Characteristics.

Factor	Characteristics		Shapiro-Wilk			Mean ± SD	t or U
Factor	Characteristics		W	df	p	Mean ± SD	t or U
The degree of concentration in the class	Gender	Male	0.766	5	.041	4.45 ± 0.65	31.5^a
	Gender	Female	0.882	14	.062	4.30 ± 0.38	31.5^a
	GPA	Less than 3.5	0.927	6	.557	4.33 ± 0.49	37.0^a
	GPA	3.5 and above	0.866	13	.047	4.35 ± 0.45	37.0^a
	Career	Undecided	0.776	7	.023	4.54 ± 0.44	24.0^a
	Career	Decided	0.901	12	.164	4.23 ± 0.43	24.0^a
The relationship between online and offline classes	Gender	Male	0.841	5	.168	4.33 ± 0.70	27.5^a
	Gender	Female	0.850	14	.022	4.54 ± 0.47	27.5^a
	GPA	Less than 3.5	0.780	6	.039	4.45 ± 0.62	35.5^a
	GPA	3.5 and above	0.846	13	.025	4.50 ± 0.50	35.5^a
	Career	Undecided	0.895	7	.299	4.71 ± 0.30	28.5^a
	Career	Decided	0.847	12	.033	4.35 ± 0.59	28.5^a
Interaction between professor and students	Gender	Male	0.862	5	.235	3.53 ± 0.75	0.033
	Gender	Female	0.946	14	.500	3.52 ± 0.46	0.033
	GPA	Less than 3.5	0.860	6	.188	3.37 ± 0.56	−0.841
	GPA	3.5 and above	0.948	13	.575	3.59 ± 0.52	−0.841
	Career	Undecided	0.926	7	.515	4.08 ± 0.23	6.941***
	Career	Decided	0.902	12	.166	3.19 ± 0.33	6.941***
The convenience of video lectures	Gender	Male	0.840	5	.164	4.10 ± 0.69	−0.047
	Gender	Female	0.944	14	.473	4.12 ± 0.39	−0.047
	GPA	Less than 3.5	0.871	6	.229	4.05 ± 0.54	−0.405
	GPA	3.5 and above	0.938	13	.429	4.15 ± 0.45	−0.405
	Career	Undecided	0.926	7	.516	4.44 ± 0.30	2.746*
	Career	Decided	0.905	12	.181	3.92 ± 0.44	2.746*
Interest in flip learning teaching and learning methods	Gender	Male	0.832	5	.144	3.30 ± 0.58	1.316
	Gender	Female	0.942	14	.438	3.00 ± 0.39	1.316
	GPA	Less than 3.5	0.953	6	.763	2.76 ± 0.43	−2.369*
	GPA	3.5 and above	0.943	13	.497	3.23 ± 0.39	−2.369*
	Career	Undecided	0.970	7	.897	3.46 ± 0.27	3.577**
	Career	Decided	0.964	12	.844	2.86 ± 0.39	3.577**

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. The ^a indicates the results of the Mann-Whitney U-test.

First, the four factors of class satisfaction and PBFC interest did not differ significantly by gender. In terms of GPA, majors (m = 3.23, SD = 0.39) with a GPA of 3.5 or higher were more interested in their classes than majors (m = 2.76, SD = 0.43) with a GPA below 3.5 (t = −2.369, p < .05). In terms of career decisions, students who intended to work in their major field were significantly less interested in professor–student interaction (m = 3.19, SD = 0.33), ease of use of video learning (m = 3.92, SD = 0.44), and interest in PBFC (m = 2.86, SD = 0.39) than students who were worried about whether to work in their major field after graduation. These findings suggest that PBFC-based culinary arts education positively affects students’ career and employment decisions.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Hands-On Cooking Training with PBFC

Participants’ responses to an open-ended question regarding the advantages and disadvantages of PBFC-based cooking training are shown in Table 8. First, students responded that the advantages of the PBFC-adapted cooking class were that they could participate in the hands-on class after they had prepared for it, they could relearn through the LMS, and communication and teamwork among team members improved. However, the disadvantages were that there was no demonstration by the instructor during the pre-class activities, students learned by themselves through YouTube videos, which decreased their understanding of the cooking process, and team activities were inadequate because students did not actively participate.

Table 8.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Cooking practice Education with PBFC.

Division	Stage	Student’s opinion
Advantages	Pre-class	It was possible to relearn once more.
		I was able to understand the cooking method and process quickly by doing the preparation.
		I studied on my own after watching the video, so it was helpful for me to study on my own.
		The amount of preparation increased because it was necessary to discuss with the team members before the practice.
		The system for watching the video was familiar and comfortable.
		It was convenient to watch the video lecture at any time because the server was not unstable.
		These teaching and learning methods are good for preparation.
	In-class	I feel proud that I practiced it myself after watching the video and performing image training.
	Post-class	I was able to build friendships among the same team members.
		Since it was not done by looking at the professor’s demonstration, the finished plating was diverse for each team.
		Communication between team members increased.
		I concentrated and participated in the class.
Disadvantages	Pre-class	Learning through YouTube videos is difficult.
		I want to study following a video where the professor demonstrates.
		I don’t understand because the cooking process in YouTube videos is not accurate.
		I don’t understand because the professor explains it in words.
		It would be nice if a little demonstration is provided with the video.
		I wish the professor would demonstrate a difficult part.
		I wish the professor would announce more YouTube video address.
	In-class	The preparation could not be effective because there was no demonstration by the professor.
	Post-class	I want to do it alone, not as a team practice.
		I want to clean the lab systematically.
		I wish the professor would give me some feedback.
		There was a student who attended without prior learning among the team members, so the cooking practice did not proceed well.

Final Instructional Design Model of PBFC-Infused Cooking Practice Course

Based on the initial curriculum model and considering the satisfaction, advantages, and disadvantages of PBFC as perceived by students after the course was implemented, the final curriculum model for the PBFC-adapted cooking lab class is shown in Figure 5. Initially, the final model for PBFC-adapted cooking lab instruction included the students’ main request, which was a video demonstration by the instructor. In response to the opinion that it is necessary to show a simple demonstration video instead of showing all the cooking processes of the dishes to be practiced in the online preparation phase, we included a mini demonstration by the instructor at the beginning of the pre-school phase or in the teaching phase for parts that are difficult for students to understand. Additionally, the original instructional model called for assessing learner learning through a reflection journal for the midterm and a team assessment of the finished meal for the final exam. However, some learners noted the need for fair assessment as a drawback of the PBFC-based cooking course in the open-ended survey questions. Therefore, the researchers included appropriate assessment processes in the final instructional model, such as weekly assessment of team activities by the instructor or assessment of team activities by team members, rather than just team assessment at the end of the semester.

Figure 5.

Final instructional design model of cooking practice education with PBFC.

Discussion

This study aimed to apply PBFC in a cooking course and to analyze learners’ satisfaction with the course as well as their interest in this teaching and learning method. The results yielded by the analysis of the educational effectiveness of this PBFC-based course can be summarized as follows:

First, student satisfaction with the focus of the FC was consistently positive, as were the connection between online and offline courses, the interaction between professors and students, and the ease of using video learning. The highest satisfaction level was seen with the connection between online and offline courses. However, student interest in PBFC was low; indeed, 42.8% indicated that their interest in PBFC was moderate or low, suggesting a low level of interest in PBFC teaching and learning methods. These results signal that culinary majors are less likely to take or recommend a PBFC course to other students in the future.

Second, there was no significant difference in class satisfaction and interest based on students’ gender. These results support the findings of J. M. Nam (2022) and Son et al. (2015), who found no gender differences in perceptions of or satisfaction with FC. Additionally, students with higher GPAs in their first year of study responded more positively to PBFC-adapted cooking lab education. Students who were still undecided about their post-graduation careers were more satisfied with the interactivity between professors and students and the ease of use of video learning than students who had already decided on post-graduation careers, and the former rated their interest in PBFC courses positively. This is contrary to So (2022), who found that career motivation positively influences participation in major classes.

Based on these findings, the following academic and pedagogical conclusions are drawn: first, this study proposes a model for instructional design that applies PBFC to culinary practice education using the ADDIE Model—a model for instructional systems development which uses the trial-and-error method. Educators predict that, even after COVID-19 pendemic ends, some level of noncontact instruction will be maintained rather than returning to pre-COVID-19 levels, and that various forms of blended learning integration involving face-to-face and noncontact instruction will become the new norm for higher education (Jung et al., 2021; K. H. Lee, 2020; S. H. Park & Park, 2022). The academic significance of this study is that it can reduce the risk of being overly preoccupied with the application of PBFC in culinary arts education and overlooking the purpose and process of FCs.

Second, although students exhibit high satisfaction and diligently engage in pre-class preparation in PBFC-based courses, they may hesitate to enroll in similar courses in the future due to the intensive workload and the complexity and time demands of culinary practice. To reduce this hesitation, educators should consider gradually introducing the PBFC method. For example, during the initial implementation of PBFC, combining demonstration-based culinary practice with a FC could allow students more time to adapt to the new learning method. Additionally, in the early stages of PBFC adoption, reducing the burden of online pre-class preparation is essential. For instance, in this study, only two of the five components of a Western main dish could be covered through PBFC, with the remaining three components learned through in-class demonstrations. Such a gradual introduction of new teaching and learning methods can help alleviate students’ learning burdens and build confidence in their practical skills.

Third, in terms of educational implications, this study did not provide instructors’ demonstration videos during online pre-learning. However, in the student satisfaction survey, many students declared that the instructor’s demonstration video should be provided during online preparatory learning, indicating that culinary majors rely heavily on demonstration and practice methods in culinary lab education. However, providing online videos of instructor demonstrations of the items which one wants them to practice is not substantially different from the traditional show-and-tell method, except for the separation between online and offline. Providing videos also hinders students’ ability to self-direct their learning, which is an advantage of the FC and diminishes its effectiveness. However, it may be necessary to provide a brief demonstration of a part of the cooking process that students do not understand instead of a full demonstration to improve their understanding of the cooking process.

Fourth, an important factor that determines the learning effectiveness of PBFC-based cooking instruction is the organic connection between pre-lesson and in-class activities as well as the active participation of learners when it comes to in-class activities. Therefore, the instructor’s strategy at each stage is important to motivate learning. To this end, team members were assigned roles and responsibilities based on the components of fish- or meat-based main dishes to encourage majors to actively participate in pre-class and in-class activities held face-to-face. However, there were cases in which team activities were not smoothly conducted due to differences in learning levels among team members and absences owing to COVID-19 infection and personal circumstances. Therefore, it is necessary to naturally link the cooking practice items with the grade evaluation items rather than simply completing the former through face-to-face in-class activities and providing feedback. Furthermore, it is necessary to plan a fair individual evaluation through a relative evaluation between team members to encourage learners to participate responsibly in cooking practice education and actively collaborate with their peers to learn.

Fifth, comprehensive support from the university for courses that have implemented the FC model is essential to alleviate the preparation burden on instructors due to PBFC flipped learning. Instructors should be provided opportunities for training in new teaching methods and technologies, while technical support for online learning tools and platforms is also necessary. Additionally, to ensure that instructors have sufficient time to develop learning materials and prepare for classes, benefits such as workload reduction, research support, and incentives for educational innovation should be established. This comprehensive support would enable instructors to provide students with a better educational experience and promote successful implementation of the FC.

Despite its academic and educational implications, this study has several limitations. First, the classes in which PBFC was applied could not be divided due to college regulations and the practical environment of the department; therefore, a comparison group could not be formed at the research design stage. Therefore, in future studies, it will be necessary to investigate and compare learners’ perceptions at the beginning and end of the semester to measure learning success or distinguish between experimental and control groups to compare the effectiveness of teaching and learning methods. Second, flipped learning should not be limited to pre-learning, but should also be seamlessly connected to “learner-centered activities” in the classroom based on pre-learning. However, in the first semester of the 2022 academic year in which this study was conducted, many students were infected with COVID-19, were quarantined for a week, and could not participate in offline classes, so many teams could not conduct smooth face-to-face activities in class. It is therefore necessary to apply this teaching and learning method to cooking classes during the COVID-19 pandemic in the future and to compare the educational impact.

Footnotes

Author Contributions

Tae Kyun Na, as the principal investigator and corresponding author, was responsible for the overall study design, implementation of the research, and statistical analysis. Saem Han contributed to manuscript writing, statistical analysis, and manuscript revisions.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

ORCID iD

Tae Kyun Na

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Na Tae Kyun, upon reasonable request.

References

Ahn

M. R.

(2016). A study on the factors that influence the flipped class and learners’ satisfaction level. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 114–136.

Bergmann

Sams

(2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.

Boo

Lim

Kim

(2017). The relationship between employment potential of students participating in apprenticeship and core competence, creative behavior, and intrinsic motivation. Korean Academic Association of Business Administration, 30(9), 1559–1585. https://doi.org/10.18032/kaaba.2017.30.9.1559

Cheong

S. H.

(2020). The perceptions and preferences for blended-flipped learning in the field of finance English major. Korean Association for Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 20(10), 1157–1179. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2020.20.10.1157

Cheong

S. H.

Kwak

M. J.

(2018). The solutions for flipped-learning difficulties from the perspectives of engineering and science major learners. Korean Association for Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(10), 519–541. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2018.18.10.519

Chiou

C. C.

Tien

L. C.

Tang

Y. C.

(2020). Applying structured computer-assisted collaborative concept mapping to flipped classroom for hospitality accounting. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education, 26, 100243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2020.100243

Cho

B. R.

Lee

J. M.

(2018). A meta analysis on effects of flipped learning in Korea. Journal of Digital Convergence, 16(3), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2018.16.3.059

Choi

W. S.

Chae

H. S.

(2021). A study of learning presence on learning transfer for college students majoring in culinary and food service applying flipped learning. Foodservice Management Society of Korea, 24(1), 183–206. https://doi.org/10.47584/jfm.2021.24.1.183

Chua

K. J.

Islam

M. R.

(2021). The hybrid Project-based learning–flipped classroom: A design project module redesigned to foster learning and engagement. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 49(4), 289–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419019838335

10.

Gündüz

A. Y.

Akkoyunlu

(2020). Effectiveness of gamification in flipped learning. Sage Open, 10(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020979837

11.

Hebaishi

S. M. A.

(2018). Using the flipped classroom model to enhance problem-based learning in a practicum course. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 10(4), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2018.095143

12.

Holik

(2016). The flipped classroom and its impact on student engagement and academic performance in a culinary arts, career and technical education program. Journal of Research in Technical Careers, 3(2), 74. https://doi.org/10.9741/2578-2118.1072

13.

Hwang

G. J.

Lai

C.-L.

Wang

S. Y.

(2015). Seamless flipped learning: A mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 449–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0043-0

14.

Jang

(2021). A study on the design of flipped learning instructional design for the subject of ‘logic and essay in early childhood of education’ using YouTube. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 12(6), 2861–2876.

15.

Jung

J. H.

Lee

(2021). A mixed-method research on no-contact curriculum and learning in Korean universities. Korean Association for Qualitative Inquiry, 7(1), 171–204. https://doi.org/10.30940/JQI.2021.7.1.171

16.

S. J.

(2020). Effect analysis of career guidance subjects in college students using flip learning. Journal of Career Education Research, 33(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.32341/JCER.2020.03.33.1.1

17.

Kim

A. K.

Davies

(2014). A teacher’s perspective on student centred learning: Towards the development of best practice in an undergraduate tourism course. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education, 14, 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2013.12.001

18.

Kim

H. J.

Kim

C. W.

(2020). A case study of flipped learning of cooking practice subject of university students. Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 20(9), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2020.20.09.129

19.

Kim

J. E.

Jeon

H. J.

Kang

J. H.

(2016). Effect of the TV food program on chef job image and major satisfaction: Targeting students majoring in food service related. International Journal of Tourism Management and Sciences, 31(7), 87–107.

20.

Kim

M. K.

Kim

S. M.

Khera

Getman

(2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003

21.

Kim

O. S.

(2020). Effect of flipped learning using media convergence in practice education on academic self-efficacy and self-directed learning of nursing students. Journal of Convergence Information Technology, 10(6), 49–58.

22.

Kim

O. S.

(2021). The effect of star chef image in cookbang on career decision self-efficacy and career preparation behavior -focusing on culinary arts major college students in Gyeongju area. Journal of Digital Convergence, 19(8), 405–413.

23.

Kim

S. G.

(2010). Implications of erudition through self-directed learning principles in medical education. Korean Medical Education Review, 12(2), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.17496/KMER.2010.12.2.005

24.

Kim

S. T.

Lee

D. Y.

(2021). Development of PBL-based flipped learning instructional design model for cultivation of communication competency in high school Korean subject curriculum. Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 27(3), 1037–1067. https://doi.org/10.15833/KAFEIAM.27.3.1037

25.

Kim

Park

(2022). A study on IC-PBL (industry-coupled problem-based learning) and learning performance measurement in higher education institutions. Korean Business Education Review, 37(6), 101–131. https://doi.org/10.23839/kabe.2022.37.6.101

26.

Koh

E. Y.

(2021). Development of instructional design model for flipped learning combined with project based learning: Focused on design college classes. Journal of Brand Design Association of Korea, 19(4), 206–216.

27.

Lee

D. K.

B. S.

Sung

M. G.

(2010). Composition of entree. Hunminsa Publishing.

28.

Lee

Kim

Lim

(2018). Development of instructional design strategies and model for flipped learning combined with project based learning. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(3), 135–164. https://doi.org/0.22251/jlcci.2018.18.3.135

29.

Lee

H. S.

Kang

S. C.

Kim

C. S.

(2015). A study on the effect of flipped learning on learning motivation and academic achievement. Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 18(2), 47–57.

30.

Lee

Park

H. K.

(2016). A study on cases for application of flipped learning in K-12 education. Journal of Digital Convergence, 14(8), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2016.14.8.19

31.

Lee

K. H.

(2020). How flipped learning reinforce project-based directing practicum class. Journal of Korean Theatre Education, 36, 151–176. https://doi.org/10.46262/KTE.36.1.5

32.

Leem

(2016). Teaching and learning strategies for flipped learning in higher education: A case study. Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 165–199. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.32.1.165

33.

Lim

Lee

K. C.

(2019). A study on the effectiveness of flipped learning in university class. Korean Association for Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(21), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2019.19.21.259

34.

Lim

(2018). A study of English preservice teachers’ perceptions on flipped classroom by their academic achievement level and gender. Journal of Linguistic Studies, 23(1), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.21291/jkals.2018.23.1.6

35.

Listiqowati

Budijanto

Sumarmi

Ruja

I. N.

(2022). The impact of project-based flipped classroom (PjBFC) on critical thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 853–868. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15346a

36.

Mahfud

Pardjono

Lastariwati

(2019). Chef’s competency as a key element in food tourism success: A literature review. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 26(3), 1057–1071. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.26329-417

37.

Marinakou

Giousmpasoglou

(2022). Chefs’ competencies: A stakeholder’s perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 5(1), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-06-2020-0101

38.

Moon

S. Y.

Son

M. A.

Song

R. R.

(2021). A study on the precarious work experiences of young cooks: Focusing on the meaning of creative labor in apprenticeship employment practices. Korean Journal of Labor Studies, 27(3), 247–397.

39.

Nam

C. W.

Shin

D. M.

(2019). The effects of blended learning instructional strategies and flipped-learning instructional strategies on undergraduate students’ social presence and group cohesion. Journal of Creative Information Culture, 5(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.32823/jcic.5.1.201904.1

40.

Nam

J. M.

(2022). A study of pre-service teachers’ perceptions and satisfaction on English education major courses using flipped learning. Journal of Language Sciences, 29(3), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.14384/kals.2022.29.3.025

41.

Park

J. M.

Chung

H. Y.

(2021). Effects of the project-based AI education program on AI ethical consciousness and creative problem-solving skills using flipped learning. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 25(5), 359–368.

42.

Park

S. H.

Park

H. J.

(2022). Ideas for implementing blended flipped learning in higher education for the post-COVID19 era. Asian Cultural Studies, 58(3), 71–95.

43.

Seo

Y. J.

Suh

E. K.

(2019). A study on the introduction and operation of flipped learning instructional model using educational contents video—Focusing on the case of D university. Korean Journal of General Education, 13(2), 331–348.

44.

Shin

H. W.

(2018a). Case study of flipped learning applied to hand sewing class in home economics education. Korean Home Economics Education Association, 30(4), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.19031/jkheea.2018.12.30.4.127

45.

Shin

J. H.

(2018b). The effects of flipped learning on brain education based personality education curriculum on adolescents’ recovery resilience and career attitude maturity. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 9(1), 147–160.

46.

Shin

S. H.

Lee

K. S.

(2021). A case study of flipped learning application of basics cooking practice subject using YouTube. Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 21(5), 488–498.

47.

Shyr

Chen

(2018). Designing a technology-enhanced flipped learning system to facilitate students’ self-regulation and performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12213

48.

Son

E. J.

Park

J. H.

I. C.

Lim

Hong

S. W.

(2015). Impact of flipped learning applied at a class on learning motivation of colleage students. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement and Intervention, 6(2), 97–117.

49.

(2022). Structure relationship between career motivation, major class engagement, and career preparation behavior: Multi-group analysis of students in college of engineering and college of education. Journal of Career Education Research, 35(2), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.32341/JCER.2022.6.35.2.23

50.

Strayer

J. F.

(2016). Designing instruction for flipped classrooms. In Reigeluth

C. M.

Beatty

B. J.

Myers

R. D.

(Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models (Vol. i, pp. 321–350). Routledge.

51.

Taşpolat

Özdamli

Soykan

(2021). Programming language training with the flipped classroom model. Sage Open, 11(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/215824402110214

52.

Techanamurthy

Alias

Dewitt

(2020). A problem-solving flipped classroom module: Developing problem-solving skills among culinary arts students. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(4), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2020.12.04.004

53.

S. W.

(2016). A study on the model of university writing course using flipped learning. College Composition and Communication, 15(1), 73–97.

54.

Yang

H. K.

Koo

K. W.

(2019). Development of evaluation scale according to major selection attributes of culinary major. Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 19(10), 397–406.

55.

Yeo

Kim

Han

(2015). Applying MOOC-based flipped learning to business education: Analysis of academic achievement and student satisfaction. Korea Business Review, 19(4), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.17287/kbr.2015.19.4.181

56.

Yoon

S. H.

(2020). Effects of flip-learning classes: Focusing on grammar skills and class satisfaction. Chosun University.