Author
Listed:
- Jinbao Yang
(School of Foreign Languages, Anshan Normal University, Anshan 114005, China
Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)
- Martin Valcke
(Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)
Abstract
Since 2000, the flipped classroom model has been widely adopted in higher education within the context of digital transformation; however, a comprehensive historical synthesis of review evidence remains limited. This study addresses this gap by conducting a review of reviews to clarify developmental trends, theoretical foundations, instructional designs, research methods, outcome variables, reported effects and implementation challenges, with the aim of informing sustainable education practices. Following the PRISMA framework, we systematically searched Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2000 and 2024. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and 25 systematic reviews met the eligibility requirements. Risk of bias and reporting quality were assessed descriptively at the review level. The results indicate generally positive perceptions among students and teachers, particularly regarding learning performance, collaboration and motivation, with the strongest evidence observed at the teaching and learning levels rather than at pedagogical or institutional levels. Substantial variation in flipped classroom designs and inconsistent reporting limited cross-study effect size synthesis. Further analysis reveals a fragmented theoretical basis and uneven attention to post-class learning processes. In response, two integrative frameworks—the Instructional Design Analysis Model for Flipped Classrooms (IDAMFC) and the Transformative Activation Theory for Flipped Classrooms (TAT-FC) are proposed to align pre-, in-, and post-class phases with learning strategies, cognitive engagement, and assessment in digitally supported environments. This study highlights the need for longitudinal designs and more comprehensive outcome measures to support sustainable educational development.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:7:p:3582-:d:1914617. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.