Effect of flipped classroom versus traditional didactic lecture on learning outcomes among medical students: A crossover study.

Sajan Skaria

doi:10.51168/kbwsaq36

Authors

Sajan Skaria Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, American International Institute of Medical Sciences Udaipur, Rajasthan, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51168/kbwsaq36

Keywords:

Anatomy education, Flipped classroom, Traditional lecture, Medical education, Active learning, MBBS students, Competency-based medical education

Abstract

Background

The flipped classroom method is a learner-centric approach that encourages active learning. Even though this method has shown promise in medical education, evidence regarding its effectiveness in undergraduate anatomy teaching remains limited.

Objective: The study compared the flipped classroom teaching method with traditional lecture-based learning among first-year MBBS students.

Materials and methods

A crossover study was conducted among 142 first-year MBBS students of both genders at American International Institute of Medical Sciences, Udaipur, Rajasthan. The average age of the participants was 19.1 ± 0.8. Two anatomy topics were taught using a flipped-classroom and traditional lecture method. Performance was assessed using pre- and post-test MCQs, and student perception was evaluated using a structured Likert-scale questionnaire. Data were analysed using t-tests, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results

FC method exhibited greater learning gains than TDL. More than 85% of students reported improved engagement, understanding, and satisfaction with this approach. The post-test scores were higher with FC teaching than with TDL for both topics. For coronary circulation, the FC group achieved a significantly greater improvement than the TDL group (t = 9.37, p < 0.001). Similarly, for bronchopulmonary segments, the FC group demonstrated a significantly higher gain score compared with the TDL group (t = 13.30, p < 0.001). Overall, flipped classroom teaching produced higher knowledge gain.

Conclusion

Flipped classroom teaching was more effective than traditional lectures in improving anatomy learning outcomes. It may be integrated into undergraduate anatomy teaching to promote active learning and student engagement.

Recommendation

The FC technique is an excellent teaching-learning tool for undergraduate programmes since it enhances academic achievement, engagement, and self-directed learning. Medical schools should encourage this approach as well as offer faculty training and relevant digital learning materials to ensure its successful implementation.

Author Biography

Sajan Skaria, Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, American International Institute of Medical Sciences Udaipur, Rajasthan, India

Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the Department of Anatomy at the American International Institute of Medical Sciences, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India. His research interests include anatomy education, competency-based medical education, innovative teaching–learning methods, clinical anatomy, and educational research. Dr. Skaria is also engaged in the development of anatomy learning resources, including practical workbooks, histology manuals, and clinical anatomy teaching materials designed to enhance undergraduate medical education. His academic goal is to integrate technology-enhanced learning with traditional anatomical teaching to improve student engagement, knowledge retention, and clinical application. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3575-5986

References

1. Zhao L, He W, Su YS. Innovative pedagogy and design-based research on flipped learning in higher education. Front Psychol. 2021;12:577002. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.577002 PMid:33679507 PMCid:PMC7935525

2. Baig MI, Yadegaridehkordi E. Flipped classroom in higher education: a systematic literature review and research challenges. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2023;20:61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00430-5

3. Spaic D, Bukumiric Z, Rajovic N, et al. The flipped classroom in medical education: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2025;27:e60757. https://doi.org/10.2196/60757 PMid:40803672 PMCid:PMC12391848

4. Nichat A, Gajbe U, Bankar NJ, et al. Flipped classrooms in medical education: improving learning outcomes and engaging students in critical thinking skills. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e48199. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.48199 PMid:38054140 PMCid:PMC10694389

5. Patnaik S, Behera M, Patnaik L. Evaluating the effectiveness of the flipped classroom model in undergraduate medical education: a quasi-experimental study. Cureus. 2025;17(6):e86312. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.86312

6. Singh K, Mahajan R, Gupta P, Singh T. Flipped classroom: a concept for engaging medical students in learning. Indian Pediatr. 2018;55(6):507-512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-018-1342-0 PMid:29978818

7. French H, Arias-Shah A, Gisondo C, et al. Perspectives: the flipped classroom in graduate medical education. NeoReviews. 2020;21(3):e150-e156. https://doi.org/10.1542/neo.21-3-e150 PMid:32123119

8. Fulton K. Upside down and inside out: flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learn Lead Technol. 2012;39:12-17. No DOI available.

9. Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Airasian PW, et al. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman; 2001.

10. Jha S, Sethi R, Kumar M, Khorwal G. Comparative Study of the Flipped Classroom and Traditional Lecture Methods in Anatomy Teaching. Cureus. 2024 Jul 11;16(7):e64378. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.64378

11. Aarti, Singh K, Rathee SK. Teaching clinical anatomy to medical students by flipped classroom. Natl Med J India.2023;36(4):246-248. doi:10.25259/NMJI_608_21 https://doi.org/10.25259/NMJI_608_21 PMid:38692642

12. Prunuske AJ, Henn L, Brearley AM, Prunuske J. A randomized crossover design to assess learning impact and student preference for active and passive online learning modules. Med Sci Educ. 2016;26:135-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0224-5 PMid:27076992 PMCid:PMC4819804

13. Dutt R, Mukhopadhyay K, Ghewade B, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of flipped classroom among undergraduate medical students: a crossover quasi-experimental study. Cureus. 2026;18(5):e84157. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.84157

14. Parekh P, Bahadoor V. The utility of multiple-choice assessment in current medical education: a critical review. Cureus.2024;16(5):e59778. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.59778

15. Young M, St-Onge C, Xiao J, et al. Characterizing the literature on validity and assessment in medical education: a bibliometric study. Perspect Med Educ. 2018;7(3):182-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40037-018-0433-X PMid:29796976 PMCid:PMC6002290

16. Koo M, Yang SW. Likert-type scale. Encyclopaedia. 2025;5(1):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5010018

17. Daniel WW, Cross CL. Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences. 11th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2018. No DOI available.

18. Phillips J, Wiesbauer F. The flipped classroom in medical education: a new standard in teaching. Trends Anaesth Crit Care. 2022;42:4-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tacc.2021.11.002