Randomized trial demonstrates equivalent skill acquisition but higher satisfaction with flipped classrooms in dental students, indicating a viable alternative to live demonstrations.
The efficiency of the flipped classroom (FC) in various educational disciplines is yet unknown, despite its growing adoption in dental education. This study investigated the relationship between general self-efficacy and student satisfaction and compared the efficacy of FC and live demonstration (LD) in teaching an analytical cognitive activity (cephalometric analysis) and a practical psychomotor skill (orthodontic wire-bending). Sixty fourth-year dental students were randomly assigned to either a flipped classroom (FC) group or a live demonstration (LD) group ( n = 30 each). Both groups received instruction in orthodontic wire-bending and cephalometric analysis using their assigned teaching method. Students also completed the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) and a satisfaction questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test, and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Intra-examiner reliability was tested using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). No significant differences in learning performance for orthodontic wire-bending or cephalometric analysis were observed between the FC and LD groups. However, students in the FC group reported significantly higher satisfaction with the teaching method ( P = 0.005). General Self-Efficacy was positively associated with student satisfaction in the FC group. Video-based FC resulted in no significant differences in learning performance compared with LD while achieving higher student satisfaction. These findings suggest that FC may represent a valuable alternative to traditional live demonstration in undergraduate orthodontic education. Higher General Self-Efficacy was associated with greater student satisfaction in the FC group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Naseri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: