Conventional versus fully online flipped learning environments: A comparison of flexibility, interaction, flow experience, and student learning outcomes

Flipped learning environments have gained popularity across disciplines because of their positive effects on student learning outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, conventional flipped learning environments were replaced by fully online flipped learning designs. Studies that compare the effects of these two flipped learning environments on student learning outcomes arrive at mixed results. Several researchers point to boundary conditions, such as flow experience, that might help explain these inconsistent findings. Drawing on flipped learning research and flow theory, we argue that fully online flipped learning environments are associated with increased flexibility, but also with decreased interaction, flow experience, and student learning outcomes. We theorize that flow experience serves as a boundary condition for the effect of flexibility and interaction on student learning outcomes in conventional flipped learning environments, while this effect is not present in fully online flipped learning environments. A multiple case study research design based on two cases - a course in a conventional flipped learning format involving 67 students and a course in a fully online flipped learning format involving 69 students - supports our hypotheses. We contribute to flipped learning research by shedding additional light on the drivers and cognitive effects behind alternative flipped learning designs. • Results of alternative flipped learning designs on student learning are mixed. • Boundary conditions, such as flow experience, might explain inconsistent findings. • Fully online flipped learning environments are associated with increased flexibility. • Conventional flipped learning leads to higher interaction, flow experience, and student learning. • Flow experience mediates the effect of flexibility and interaction on student learning.