Implementing Flipped Classroom in a Biomathematics Course Through Design-Based Research

In modern medical training, the goal has shifted from simply memorizing facts to mastering a set of practical skills that allow a future doctor to solve complex problems. This approach, known as competency-based education, requires students to not only understand biological concepts but also to wield the digital tools that analyze them. As artificial intelligence and advanced software become standard in healthcare, educators face a new challenge: how to teach these technical skills without overwhelming students or losing the human element of collaboration. One promising method for this is the "flipped classroom," a teaching model that reverses the traditional order of learning. Instead of listening to a lecture in class and doing homework alone later, students study the basic material on their own before class, freeing up face-to-face time for active problem-solving, discussion, and teamwork. The question researchers ask is whether this shift helps students truly master difficult new technologies while also improving how they work together.

A team of educators at the University of Pécs in Hungary set out to test this idea in a specialized elective course called Biocalculus 2. The course was designed for medical, pharmacy, and biotechnology students who needed to learn how to apply mathematics to real-world biological data using two specific software programs: Excel and MATLAB. The researchers wanted to see if moving the course to a flipped classroom model, combined with a rigorous testing method called Design-Based Research, would change how students felt about their own abilities to work in teams. Design-Based Research is a strategy where teachers and researchers build a lesson plan, try it out, watch what happens, and then immediately improve the plan for the next round, repeating this cycle to refine the teaching method.

The study unfolded in two distinct phases. The first phase, a pilot run, revealed that while the idea of flipping the classroom was sound, the execution was flawed. Students were given optional tasks to complete before class, but because these were not required, most did not do them. As a result, teachers spent valuable class time re-teaching basics that should have been learned at home, and the collaborative spirit of the course suffered. Recognizing this, the team redesigned the course for a second, more structured phase. In this refined version, they made pre-class preparation mandatory. Students were required to complete specific modules from an online MATLAB training course before arriving at the university. They also filled out brief surveys after each session to tell the teachers how they were feeling and what they had learned. The in-class time was then dedicated entirely to pairs of students working together to solve complex, real-world problems using the software they had studied.

The results of this second phase offered a surprising and somewhat contradictory picture. On the surface, the academic success was undeniable. The students performed exceptionally well on their final exams, with the Hungarian group averaging nearly 89 percent and the foreign group averaging over 90 percent. They had clearly learned the material and could apply the software to solve difficult problems. However, when the researchers asked the students to evaluate their own teamwork skills—such as their ability to communicate, be flexible, tolerate others, and solve problems together—the results told a different story. By the end of the semester, students rated themselves lower in eleven out of thirteen of these personal attributes compared to how they rated themselves at the start. Only two areas, communication and the ability to accept criticism, showed a slight improvement.

This drop in self-confidence did not mean the students had become worse teammates. Instead, the researchers suggest that the students' internal standards for what it means to be a good team member had simply become much higher. At the beginning of the course, the students likely judged their teamwork based on their previous, more passive experiences in traditional classrooms. As they were forced to grapple with complex, unfamiliar software and rely heavily on each other to succeed, they encountered a much higher level of difficulty. This intense experience made them realize how much they still had to learn and how difficult true collaboration can be. They began to judge themselves against a stricter, more realistic standard rather than their old, easier one. The researchers noted that while the students' self-ratings dropped, their actual performance remained high, and they observed that pairs of students were indeed working together more closely and converging on shared ways of solving problems.

The study highlights a complex reality in modern education: learning a difficult new skill in a collaborative environment can make students feel less confident about their social abilities, even as they become more competent. The high exam scores proved that the flipped classroom model worked for teaching the technical content, but the shift in student self-perception suggests that the emotional and social journey of learning is just as significant as the final grade. The researchers concluded that while the method was successful, the process of adapting to such a demanding new way of learning causes students to recalibrate their own expectations, tightening their internal standards for what constitutes effective teamwork. This insight helps educators understand that a temporary dip in student confidence might not be a sign of failure, but rather a sign that the students are engaging deeply with the material and growing into more critical, self-aware learners.