Integrating technology into school-wide adoption of flipped learning: Perceptions of a school principal

Abstract

Integrating technology into teaching and learning is important for effective education in the 21st Century. School instructional leadership plays a crucial role in determining the success of school technological transformation. This paper focuses on the instructional leadership practice in a school-wide flipped learning adoption process. It examines a school principal’s instructional leadership practice in a middle-high boarding school in China. In-depth interviews and document analysis were used as tools for data collection. The findings reveal that involving teachers as researchers is a powerful technique for managing successful instructional reform when integrating technology into classroom practice. The school principal’s lived experiences and philosophy of education contribute to the commitment of the transformation process, which in turn motivated the principal to initiate and conduct instructional reform. Moreover, the school principal is expected to be a critical actor for the overall management when mobilising teacher engagement and other available resources in the school context. The implications for practitioners are discussed.

Keywords

Educational change flipped learning school leader’s instructional leadership practice technology integration

Introduction

For decades, educators have espoused the importance of the principal as the instructional leader of the school (Neumann and Somoza-Norton, 2021; Quinn, 2002). Instructional leadership is broadly thought of as leadership for learning and is conceived of as a role carried out by an educational leader such as a school principal (Hallinger, 2010). Foriska (1994) describes instructional leadership as critical to develop and maintain an effective instructional change process in schools. Instructional changes and reforms are undertaken in many different circumstances, especially, when there is a need for student equity or new requirements in learning, focusing primarily on improving student academic performance and outcomes (Bamburg and Andrews, 1990). Researchers believe that school instructional leaders influence teachers in aligning appropriate instructional practices to their knowledge of the subject matter (Hallinger et al., 2020; Hosseingholizadeh et al., 2020). In addition, with the advance of digital technology development, school instructional leadership plays a crucial role in determining the success of technology integration at the organizational level (Patterson et al., 2021). Likewise, Hallinger (2010) points out that the school principal, as the facilitator of the development of school culture, needs to be a goal-directed individual who fosters high expectations in both students and teachers during the school’s transformation of instructional and technological reforms. Furthermore, research found that supporting the school leaders’ competence in the practical application of technology to enhance teaching and learning may facilitate teachers’ innovative pedagogical practices (Abdulrahaman et al., 2020; Chatterjee et al., 2020; Oke and Fernandes, 2020). Moreover, Sayyadi Ghasabeh (2020) specifies that effective instructional reform is often connected to school educational technology integration.

Hall and Hord (2001) conclude that principals, as instructional leaders, cannot implement successful school instructional change alone. The authors clarified that supporting teachers’ commitment is the sustenance of solid transformational leadership practice. Because teachers themselves can be barriers to reform development, school principals need to invite teachers to share leadership functions in the transformational process (Hallinger, 2010). To help teachers cope with encountered difficulties during the transformation and implementation process, researchers suggest that rather than only providing educational theories, school leaders also need to provide documented examples of how teachers can accomplish meaningful and effective technology integration when attempting to meet their pedagogical needs and goals (Hallinger, 2010; Murphy, 1988; Neumerski, 2013; Southworth, 2002).

Since the release of the Outline of China’s National Plan for Medium- and Long-term Education Reform and Development (2010–2020) in 2010, China has paid more attention to the informatisation of education and has been promoting the idea that effective classrooms require technological equipment and innovation. Even though much effort has been put into meeting these requirements of e reform, the results are still not satisfactory. In a similar vein, Wang et al. (2022) did an exploring research in ICT integration in school in China and they highlighted that the prevalence of technology in schools is anticipated to grow, but many teachers still employ technology in the same manner as before, due to the absence of guidance framework for incorporating technology in their teaching practices. When the concept of the flipped classroom emerged in 2011, many classrooms in China adopted this student-centred teaching model with technological support. The literature tells us that teachers have a flipped classroom model to follow when using technology and students’ perceptions of using a flipped classroom approach are usually positive, and that learning is more interesting (Lee and Wallace, 2018; Yang, 2017). Similarly, researchers found that students performed significantly better when they are learning through a flipped classroom approach (Webb and Doman, 2016; Yang and Chen, 2020). With this approach, students are able to learn at their own pace, prepare for lessons in advance, and participate more in lessons (Chuang et al., 2018).

However, the direct flipped learning adoption without accompanying reform and contextualisation has created a situation in which students feeling they are required to “learn by themselves” and teachers feeling that they do not know how to teach in a flipped classroom approach (Miles and Fogget, 2016). Yang (2017) argues that not all students perceive the benefits as expected, and more specifically learners who benefit most are those who already have a high level of motivation for achieving success in learning. Facilitating students’ motivation in flipped learning requires preparation by both school leaders and teachers. In this study, the learning needs and difficulties experienced by students and teachers encouraged an evaluation of how to manage successful school-wide instructional reform in order to engage students in a more effective learning environment when using technology (Chuang et al., 2018).

This paper explores a successful school principal’s instructional leadership practice and perceptions in a school-wide flipped learning adoption process. The paper is intended to assist school policymakers and practitioners with respect to how facilitating successful school instructional reform can be mediated by school leadership and management practice. It should be noted that the size of schools in China can be very large, as is the case in this middle-high boarding school. The school has one principal and several vice-principals who work collaboratively. The vice-principals oversee different aspects of the school’s operations. This study examines the school principal’s instructional leadership practice in the instructional reform involving a school-wide flipped learning adoption process.

Literature

Flipped learning

The Flipped Classroom design has revolutionised teaching in many schools requiring students to watch instructional videos at home and to do their typical homework in class. The term flipped or inverted was used to define this type of classroom practice as “schoolwork at home and homework at school” (Bergmann and Sams, 2012: 13). This organization allows direct instructions to be delivered to individuals outside of class using videos, with more strategic use of in-class time for group work and individualised attention. The flipped classroom approach has both advocates and critics. Some researchers argued that “flipped class is all about videos” (Bergmann and Sams, 2016: 81). For instance, Jacot et al. (2014) dispute the effectiveness of preassigned content and contend that a pre-recorded lecture was not better than a live lecture. This view is supported by Ash (2012), who writes that the flipped classroom method is a poor method of instruction, it is simply turning lectures into videos, and simply having students watch videos instead of listening to lectures. This does not guarantee that they will be more engaged. A broader perspective has been adopted by Bergmann and Sams (2014) and other empirical researchers (Israel, 2014; Kirch, 2016) who argue that a flipped classroom is only an entry point, as one kind of the flipped learning models, and that flipped learning is still evolving to meet the needs of learners. For example, teachers can choose flip fully their classroom or only choose part of their class to flip in serve their learning objectives. Nevertheless, many teachers have found that the power of flipped learning goes beyond using videos as homework, it lies in the delivery of instructions to individual learners and so providing students a higher level of ownership of their learning with technological support.

Further, Bergmann and Sams (2014) proposed a new concept of flipped learning as an educational approach enabling student’s access to direct instruction, experienced individually at their own time, space and pace, often enabled by digital technologies. In the same vein, Ash (2012) notes that flipping learning is one approach to provide a wider framework of instructional methods and to support every student in a classroom. The teachers who are most effective at using flipped learning are thoughtful and reflective about their teaching practices in making the best use of the technology and resources in general (Kirch, 2016). In order for students to engage deeply in learning, they can be given more ownership to pursue their passions and creativity. Therefore, flipped learning allows a focus on digital pedagogical implementation, with a view to meeting the diverse needs of learners.

Considering all of this evidence, it seems that flipped learning is an umbrella term used to facilitate a range of pedagogies and support an environment where a classroom is a place of learning where the students are empowered (Bergmann and Sams, 2012; Galindo, 2014; Israel, 2014; Kirch, 2016). Therefore, flipped learning does not make teaching easier; instead, it raises questions about how to make the best use of face-to-face time and technological tools in classroom practice (Kirch, 2016). However, there are barriers to the efficacious implementation of a flipped learning approach. For example, Wang (2017) indicated that a successful flipped learning approach requires motivated and confident teachers, who also require appropriate levels of time, resources, and technological support to develop a flipped model that best fits embedded social settings. Therefore, the effectiveness of technology integration for teachers is crucial for school leaders to consider in successful school transformation.

Technology integration

Technology integration is an important element of effective contemporary education (Bauer and Kenton, 2005; Kaya and Adiguzel, 2021). Educational technology has become a cornerstone of many country’s efforts to improve students’ performance in K-12 schools (Dogan et al., 2021). In the digital era, teachers need to integrate technology into their daily teaching and replace traditional methods with more effective tools and devices (Cakir, 2012). However, Neufeld et al. (2007) argue that school leaders should ensure that teachers understand that the ultimate goal of technology integration is to enhance the teaching and learning process, while not completely replacing traditional methods. According to Tezci (2011), teachers need to use technology in more creative and productive ways to create more engaging and rewarding activities, and more effective lessons. Considering teacher workloads and the pressure of change, school instructional leaders need to prepare teachers to act as catalysts in technological transformations (Watts-Taffe et al., 2003). Likewise, Ottenbreit-Leftwich et al. (2010) recommend that schools provide teachers with solid evidence to support the positive impact of technology-based instructions on student learning and achievement in standardised tests. This support increases teachers’ confidence in putting theory into practice. Moreover, schools need to provide access for teachers to use technology and offer teacher workshops or training courses to improve their technological skills and prepare them for the possible challenges that the transformation involves (Delialioglu and Yildirim, 2007; Staples et al., 2005). Similarly, Tiba and Condy (2021) emphasised schoolteachers should be taught how to use digital tools and devices so that they are equipped to use the knowledge and skills acquired in their professional practice.

Furthermore, schools and related institutional systems need to employ new policies to involve teachers in decision-making and planning processes regarding incorporating technology into classrooms (Agyei, 2021; Almusawi et al., 2021; Yurtseven Avci et al., 2020). Likewise, Fenwick (2003) states that teachers who have a sense of ownership of educational changes based on their personal needs feel more empowered to implement changes. In other words, change will only successfully transform classroom practice if it aligns with teachers’ educational attitudes, beliefs, and values, and especially with that which facilitates self-initiated actions in practice. For example, a recent study by Sun and Gao (2019) analyses the roles of teachers and school leaders in a school-wide flipped-classroom adoption process. Based on their study, the authors stress that the school principal has an important role as both an initiator and strategy planner in technology-supported instructional reform. The instructional leadership in their research was distributed across the whole school. The authors also found that teachers in their study had developed four new roles in the instructional reform: learner, facilitator to student-centred learning, collaborator, and researcher. Furthermore, the research highlights that a clear and coherent vision is critical in policy and practice for the success of school instructional reform.

Previous research has indicated that both external and internal factors need to be considered when grappling with technology integration, especially from the perspective of leadership in relation to strategic planning, policymaking, implementation, and reflective outcome evaluations (Ghavifekr et al., 2014; Hallinger, 2003; Murphy, 1988). Tondeur et al. (2008) found that school-related policies, such as a technology plan, technology support, and technology training, significantly affect the use of technology in the classroom. These studies would seem to support Dexter and Richardson’s (2020) statement that effective leadership practices are empirically shown to influence teaching and learning by applying a conceptual framework derived from leadership practices. The authors also found that leadership practices for building professional capacity include providing teachers with opportunities to learn, creating communities of practice for them, considering their individualised needs, and addressing issues of access and support. In another study, Tiba and Condy (2021) examined a number of factors that both enabled and hindered 16 pre-service schoolteachers’ readiness to use technology during professional practice. They highlighted the importance of consistent and effective modelling on the use of technology by teacher educators in order to equip teachers to effectively teach with technology during professional practice.

While many studies explain the role of school leaders and teachers in technology integration on an individual level, school leaders and their colleagues are concerned with the factors affecting teachers’ use of technology and how teachers interact with n the whole institutional community. However, there is a limited number of studies that explore the perceptions of principals in relation to their experiences of school-wide flipped learning adoption in China. This research aims to help school leaders and practitioners understand the role of school instructional leadership practice in instructional reform involving the integration of technology in a flipped learning approach. The findings of this study may provide Ministry of Education (MoE) policymakers with insights into the nature of school leaders’ engagement with the ecological situation in schools in China. With this intention in mind, overarching research question is proposed:

How does a school principal initiate and conduct instructional reform involving technology integration?

Method

Research environment

This paper is based on a case study conducted in a Chinese middle-high boarding school that has been working on implementing the flipped classroom teaching model with the support of technology for more than 7 years. This middle-high school is located in an urban city in China. The school has continuously implemented educational reforms over decades. It is a large, whole-subject experimental school. The school has six grades from 7 to 12, and all students are required to board in school from Monday to Friday. This school has implemented school-wide flipped learning as one of their instructional reforms. In the new teaching model, traditional teaching practice was reversed. Online materials replaced traditional lectures. The school provides one personal IPad to each student, and teachers post instructional videos via the students’ tablets. Students access the materials via an online learning system and review the instructional videos during the mandatory, timetabled self-study sessions. During the class time with teachers, students engage in student-centred activities organised and facilitated by the teachers. The reform began in 2013 and presented great achievement in 2018 (See Table 1).

Table 1.

The timeline of the instructional reform supported by school wide technology integration.

Sep, 2013: Four experimental classes were chosen to use the flipped classroom model (2 classes in Grade 7 and 2 classes in Grade 10)

Nov, 2013: The number of experimental classes increased to 28

Jan, 2014: The number of experimental classes increased to 52

April, 2014: The number of experimental classes increased to 68

Sept, 2014: The flipped classroom model was implemented across the whole school

July, 2015: The project results were presented at the “China-US principals’ Summit Forum”

Oct, 2016: The branch school began to implement flipped classrooms

Sept, 2018: The school became the largest and whole-subject experimental school operating the Flipped Classroom model in the country

Research design

The school principal’s instructional leadership practice in the middle-high boarding school in China was the focus for this study. In-depth interviews with the principal and three teachers, along with document analysis were used as tools for data collection.

Sampling

In this study, the school-wide flipped learning adoption was led by the instructional school principal. The principal was charged with the development of policies and implementation strategies in teaching and learning. The work of the principal covers developing and reinforcing the adapted flipped learning framework, teacher education and organising school-based research. In this study, the three teachers were sampled through their volunteer participation in the project. Table 2 shows information about the four participants involved in this research: one instructional principal of the school and the three teachers.

Table 2.

Graphical information of the four participants.

Participants	Gender	Years of teaching	Subject
Tom (Principal)	Male	35	Physics
Summer (Teacher)	Female	3	English
Vivian (Teacher)	Female	5	English
Kris (Teacher)	Male	3	Math

Data collection tools

In this research, individual semi-structured principal and teachers’ interviews were conducted in the school. A guided interview process was used to focus on topics that serve the goal of the research (Rabionet, 2011) (see, Appendix 1: a semi-structured interview protocol). In addition, a pleasant environment was created by offering snacks and drinks for participants to establish good rapport with them (Boggs and Eyberg, 1990). In this study, school generated documents were collected and analysed several documents, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3.

Documents used for this study.

The caption numbers	The document titles used for this study
Table 1	The timeline of the instructional reform supported by school wide technology integration
Table 4	School ranking and students registered from other cities from 2011 to 2019
Figure 2	The overall model of the Flipped Classroom
Figure 3	Micro-class recording approaches generated by the research center
Figure 4	Students watching the instructional videos using the personal terminal devices –IPad
Figure 5	Customized carts and patch panels for charging iPads

Data analysis

Thematic analysis was used with the interview data, and themes were generated through coding. Coding is a way to reduce data to reveal the relevant issues (Holton, 2007). Specifically, in this study, the coding process followed a process of opening coding, axial coding, and selective coding to generate themes (Braun and Clarke, 2019). The opening coding begins with identification and categorization of the repeated concepts (open coding). For example, the instructional principal shared several reasons about why he made decisions on commencing the school-wide change. The first narrated story was about “…school ranking is valued and the concerns on the school ranking drop in 2011...” Then the story was categorised as a concept of “the school’s dramatic drop in academic ranking in 2011”. However, the categories merely described the data and must be further integrated to form the theory (O’Connor, 2012). In the last step of integrating and refining the theory (selective coding), the authors identified the ‘core’ category to which all other categories must relate. For instance, the core category of “Motives to Change” came from shared stories: (a) the school’s dramatic drop in academic ranking in 2011; (b) policy support and technological development; (c) changes in student’s learning needs; (d) the theoretical framework of flipped classroom emerged, and (e) the principal’s lived experiences and philosophy in education. This is one of the main themes of the study. An example of coding process is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

An example of coding process.

Trustworthiness of the research

In this study, triangulation of data was achieved using the data sources of the principal interview, teacher interviews, and document analysis (Rapley, 2018). In addition, peers’ feedback was sought in the process of coding to generate the most relevant themes. Transcripts of interview data were given to the participants to check for accuracy and consistency in relation to their shared experience of the interview (Carlson, 2010).

Ethical considerations

The ethical approval was obtained from a university; an institution with which the first author is affiliated. The school principal granted permission for the study. All participants agreed to participate by reading and signing an informed consent form. The teachers’ anonymity and confidentiality were protected through the use of pseudonyms.

Findings

Motives to change

In the schooling system in China, students’ academic performance is highly valued. It is risky and challenging for a school principal to decide to change instructional leadership practice. In this study, the instructional principal perceived five motives for change: (a) a dramatic drop in school academic ranking in 2011; (b) Ministry of Education support for technological development; (c) the needs of student learning; (d) the emergence of the theoretical framework for the flipped classroom; and (e) the principal’s personal lived experiences and philosophical understanding of education.

The school’s dramatic drop in academic ranking in 2011

One of the principal’s main motives to change to using flipped learning with technology integration was the dramatic drop of the school in academic ranking in 2011. This drop indicated that the teaching and learning in 2011 was not effective enough, and students’ academic performance was not satisfactory. Instructional reform was needed to be undertaken to focus primarily on the improvement of student academic outcomes. The principal elaborated:

The schooling system in China is highly competitive and academically oriented, emphasising educational achievements from a young age. For a developing country, the number of places available in elementary schools is highly inadequate compared to students applying for admission. The vast majority of parents hope and expect that their children will secure access to the critical school. The Ministry of Education dominates summative assessment. To meet these requirements, students need to prepare for the high school entrance examination fully, pass the Provincial Exam (Zhong Kao) and the National Exam (Gaokao) before securing admission to highly regarded universities. These factors bring tremendous pressure to parents, teachers, and students.

The principal’s concerns about the drop in the school’s academic ranking is evidenced by the school-generated document shown in Table 4 below. After the school-wide adoption of flipped learning in 2013, the school ranking and student enrolments dramatically increased. There were 2800 registered students outside the city in 2013 compared to 400 in 2008. Before 2019, the school ranking increased and entered the top 12 in the country and registered students from other cities climbed to 1200.

Table 4.

School ranking and students registered from other cities from 2011 to 2019.

The trajectory of ranking in the city	The increasing number of registered students from other cities
Before 2006, the top 5 of 70 high schools in the city	2008, Students registered outside the city: 400
In 2011, 38^th out of 56 high schools in the city	2013, Students registered outside the city: 2800
Ranked 2th out of the 61 senior high schools in the city	2018, Students registered outside the city: 9000
Ranked 2th out of the 61 senior high schools in the city	2019, Students registered outside the city: 12000

As shown in Table 4, the school was a high-ranking school and in the top five of 70 high schools in the city in 2006. However, a dramatic drop happened in 2011: 38 out of 56 high schools in the city. This drop in ranking was the motive for seeking instructional reform in teaching with the intention of making learning more effective.

Policy support and technology development

With the policy of facilitating digitalised education (MoE, 2011), schools were instructed to conduct educational reform that would require the progressive introduction of technology. This development enabled schools to equip classrooms and incorporate new curricula, and hence instigate new classroom practices. The interview data of the principal echoes the implementation of this policy:

The idea was nurtured by the supportive policy of the Chinese Ministry of Education. Especially with the development of the technology. The devices were more affordable for the school…

This understanding is also echoed by a policy in the Chinese Ministry of Education (2011) that states: “Facilitating digitalized education is a way of promoting effective and qualitative learning”. The principal continued, stating that with policy support and technology development, the instructional reform is preparing to go further:

Both hardware and software tools are developed. In our school, we adopted hardware including Campus Mirror server, Gigabit Campus Network, Classroom Wi-Fi, personal terminal learning. Besides, teaching resources, which included:

• Micro Lesson design and recording.

• Lesson Plan.

• Digitalised learning platform

• Instructional videos

The extract indicates that a variety of instructional technology development was implemented to bring technical support into the classroom to facilitate effective learning and teaching. Government support provided the backbone of the instructional reform with technology integration.

Changes in students’ learning needs

Another theme that emerged as a primary motive for this project has to do with the changes when attending to students’ learning needs during vacations. The following statement from the principal’s interview illustrates this point:

We explored the reasons and found that the students could not get timely feedback during the long break [vacation]. To solve this problem, we asked the teachers to make instructional videos (50 minutes each) and put them online during the following winter break (in 2009). This strategy worked very well. This was the trigger for me to think about using technology to improve teaching and learning—the failure of a summer homework program in 2008. We conducted a more successful homework program following the winter break and this provided a solution for the previous failure. We utilized pre-recorded instructional videos to assist students in learning when they were at home. The success of this strategy inspired me to prepare to make change across a broader range of challenges.

The students’ learning needs and the current schooling system drove the instructional principal to realise that there was a necessity to change. The instructional principal further shared:

In China [in 2019], the Ministry of Education prescribes seven subjects, including Chinese, maths, English, physics, chemistry, political education, and history. All subjects need to be examined through summative assessment. However, not all the subjects carry the same weight in the examination. Chinese, maths, and English have the highest number of points (150), while the other subjects’ range in number of points from 60 to 90. Consequently, as class time is limited, teachers have to give more homework after class - to practice at home alone or with the help of their parents to consolidate knowledge. As a result, more than 80 per cent of students go to bed after 10 pm every night. Because many parents cannot directly assist their children in their schoolwork at home and as such promote their children’s skills. For helping students complete their homework at home independently, we made instructional videos for students to watch when they have questions on the homework. They can learn themselves and get the help they need from the video at home. We consistently made many explorations by integrating technology into teaching and learning. However, the changes that result from this educational reform are fragmented and at this point lack the necessary theoretical support and a systematic section model.

Teachers were under pressure from their schools to deliver all the curriculum content. To accomplish this, teachers acted as information transmitters and cut down on students’ classroom activities. All the time wasted during the summer holidays worried many teachers and school leaders. For this reason, students’ learning needs motivated the school to utilise technology to make videos for the purpose of assisting student learning.

The theoretical model of flipped classroom emerged

To address the question of how to best use face-to-face class time, a pedagogical approach was developed requiring students to watch instructional videos at home and do their usual homework in class. This change in the learning schedule allowed direct instructions to be delivered to individual students outside class time using videos, while more strategic use was made of in-class time, involving group work and individualised attention. In this study, the instructional principal identified that the flipped classroom model supported the need for instructional reform when this was accompanied by technology integration. The school decided to initiate a technological transformation in response to perceived needs for educational change. The instructional principal commented that:

To meet the students' learning needs, we had the basic idea for integrating technology into daily teaching across the whole school. However, I was struggling as I had no theoretical model to draw on … until we learned about “flipped classroom” in 2012 from Bergmann and Sam’s research…

After learning the new pedagogical approach used by Bergmann and Sams (2012), the school principal had the theoretical support for flipped classrooms to conduct the school-wide adoption. The concept of flipped classrooms emerged in America, which is rooted in a western cultural background. The dramatic difference between the United States and China requires a long process of adaption for its successful introduction to the Chinese education settings. The principal reflected that:

In 2013, we initially adopted and skimpily copied the [flipped classroom] model into two experimental classes. We made flipped learning videos for students to watch before class, and hands-on activities were designed to facilitate student classroom practice. After 3 years of trials, we formed a new customized model to suit our school’s student learning needs. However, the direct flipped learning adoption without considering the school settings led to insufficient learning due to students’ lack of self-regulated skills to learn by themselves. They were used to being spoon-fed. Furthermore, teachers also faced difficulty in making the best use of classroom practice time when students were back to class. It turned out that Chinese students are different from Western students in their learning habits; the former are not so independent in their learning. They need a teacher’s guidance when learning by themselves and in addition to this, teachers need a systematic procedure to follow when they implement the flipped classroom approach.

The flipped classroom concept has become the main facilitating element of instructional reform in China. Operation of the flipped classroom has increased the principal’s confidence that the model can be well adapted in the high schools in China. The school began its experimental classes in 2013, and this educational and customized adoption has continued.

The Principal’s lived experiences and philosophy in education

K-12 education in China continues to maintain an exam-oriented educational system. Facing pressure from parents who are expecting good academic performance from their children in the entrance examination for higher education, most school leaders tend to pay most attention to the academic results, hesitating to take the risk of educational reforms, such as the implementation of the flipped learning approach. However, for some leaders, their values of education and living experiences may provide them with extra motivation for change through educational reform. This view can be seen in the following feedback from the principal’s interview:

I am deeply aware of the importance of equity in education with regard to the case of individual students and their families. My educational belief is to help as many students as possible to access to higher education and to have the opportunity to see the world. However, the average number of pupils per teacher in China was 14.49 after 2018 in middle-high schools. Fortunately, technology can be a powerful tool for transforming learning when used effectively, and technology can greatly contribute to creating equity in schools. It removes barriers to learning materials, supports students when they come across varied learning contexts and needs. I think that technology integration in school means more than simply providing devices and connectivity. It also means allowing every student to learn from teachers who understand how to use technology that will enhance their learning and create quality learning experiences for students with special needs.

The principal indicated his awareness of the importance of equity in education provides him motivation in seeking instructional reform for the effectiveness of technology integration. The principal illustrated his concerns, saying:

In my opinion, we should provide each student with customised teaching and learning strategies that promotes their own interests rather than educating them as if they were learning machines.

The above extract indicates that the instructional principal perceives the importance of individualisation in students' learning and wellbeing development. The principal shared how to help students in developing their own interest:

I think personalised learning is my educational dream, and I am still searching for a developmental path that will enable this dream. To me, personalized learning is an educational approach that aims to customize learning for each student's strengths, needs, skills, and interests. Each student gets a learning plan that is based on what they know and how they learn best. In the school, we are trying our best to maximize the opportunities of attending to each student’s personal learning needs. I'm hoping that we can assist students to discover their own learning interests. It is critical to make the best use of technology as a means of supporting effective learning. In this way, students will devote more time to extracurricular activities like dance, drawing, sketching, and sports training.

The principal was aware that technology integration could be a facilitator for building the learner-centred teaching and learning approach. The lived experiences and values of the instructional principal facilitated the transformation when integrating technology into learning. In the next section, ‘work closely with teachers’, a second main theme that arose from the data is presented.

Work closely with teachers

The other significant theme identified in the principal’s interviews and teacher interviews, and supported by document analyses was “work closely with teachers”. The subthemes within this theme are: a) Teachers first with technology assistance; b) Using instructional learning to facilitate teacher leadership practice; c) Provide a model for technology integration; d) A model for instructional video making.

Teachers first with technology assistance

The instructional principal found that once the decision to change had been made, it became crucial to inspire teachers to participate in the transformation process. The principal shared his philosophy on working with teachers:

School is a place where students can learn many things, develop their personalities etc. with teachers in a routine way for 12 years in the schooling system in China. We can say that the school is the student’s second home and the teacher their second mother. A school cannot operate without teachers, and teachers are the pillars of education. As school leaders, we need to provide support to teachers with professional learning and inspire them to love their students and forge their careers in our school. School reform is akin to a war, and teachers are the warriors in the battle for school reform. If a school wants to win the reform battle, it must persuade the teachers to fight alongside their principal rather than simply providing weaponry, such as teacher workshops.

The extract above revealed that the principal holds the beliefs that inspiring teachers to engage in the transformation rather than only giving teacher workshops is crucial for taking an instructional reform forward. These beliefs of the principal were supported by Vivian’s view in the interview:

…The school cares for us not only in professional learning but also in personal life. . I didn't spend money to buy vegetables for my family since I started my career in this school here. The school has a “free vegetables for teachers” policy that the school signed a contract with the vegetable farm and paid them yearly. The farmers send vegetables every Monday to campus, and every teacher could get their part of vegetables to bring home for free. We feel being cared for to be a member of the community.

Vivian felt that the school is governed by a group of people who make policies to care and support teachers. As school leaders, they not only provide support to teachers with professional learning but also show caring to them in personal life. In return, this inspires them to love their students and forge their careers in our school. The view was evidenced by the principal, as he said:

While I think student-directed learning has a place, having someone to provide guidance is essential to learning. I think teachers make a school. Otherwise, it’s just a building. A good teacher can teach anywhere. For 35 years I have been at this school. I believe that the role of teachers is the most important factor in a school's success. Teachers are people who teach, and teaching is the heartbeat of a school; good teaching allows pupils to learn more effectively. I can say who I think the best teacher is: they have a real passion for teaching, love teaching and students, and love relating to them in a way that will provide that moment of insight and understanding. They not only provide knowledge but the insight into the future. My understanding of leadership in an interplay involving teachers, students, parents, technology, and school leaders. That is to say when incorporating technology school wide with a management system that places the teacher as the first concern of school development.

The above extract reveals that the principal believes that teaching quality is the essence of a good school. Teachers matter more than the properties. Therefore, a school principal needs to know how to help teachers develop their professional teaching and management skills in teacher leadership.

Using instructional learning to facilitate teacher leadership practice

With regard to leadership practice, the principal believed that teachers are critical to successfully transforming instructional reform into classroom practice. After the school decided to implement the flipped classroom model in 2013, the principal assumed responsibility for developing policies and specific strategies, including developing and reinforcing the new curriculum, organising school-based research, building a supportive, collaborative environment for teachers, and providing professional development. The principal commented that supervising and assisting teachers in developing instructional activities relating to content knowledge facilitates their engagement and confidence in practice:

I work with teachers to help them create instructional materials. They can gain a better understanding of the essence of teaching as a result of this training. Teachers get more enthusiastic about the teaching profession. For example, last semester I supervised a teacher who was developing an instructional activity for a school symposium. I encouraged him to find tips and ideas from the internet. He worked hard with some guidance and, as a result, he was awarded first prize in the category of activity design. As a result of his achievement, he has been promoted to a teacher leader in year 7.

The principal shared his experiences of using instructional learning to facilitate teacher leadership practice. Hallinger (2010) states that leaders need to have a deep, current, and critical understanding of the learning process to mobilise the school’s human and material resources to promote teaching and support learning. An instructional principal normally has a long history of teaching before being promoted as a school leader. The rich teaching experiences facilitate instructional leadership practice in helping the teachers in subject teaching. The principal elaborated:

I provide suggestions to teachers' instructional activity designs based on my 35 years of teaching experience. I hope I can be deeply involved with the designing process with the teacher from the design stage to classroom practice and student evaluation. Because I think teachers’ learning is a cyclical process and not fragmented, they learn from their teaching practice. My discussions with teachers normally cover the instructions on the concept of knowledge, designing activities for classroom practice and after-class evaluation. When the discussion is done, I always come to the classroom to observe the teacher's classroom practice. After the observation, I provide feedback to teachers after the classroom observation to help them refine the next instructional design.

In this school, problem-focused scaffolding on co-designing instructional activities with teachers appeared to be an effective way of engaging teachers in instructional leadership practice. This view was supported by one of the teacher participants, Summer, as she shared:

I have been in this school for three years, and the instructional principal often observes our classes. Although he is a physics teacher, he always makes notes very carefully in observing my English class. Afterwards, he gives feedback and suggestions in designing the next lesson. It helps me to polish my teaching skills.

Research has shown that instructional leadership, which focuses on direct classroom supervision, working with teachers on the school’s instructional program, solving instructional problems collaboratively, helping teachers secure resources and providing staff development activities, all help to make leadership effective (Spillane and Coldren, 2015).

Provide a model for technology integration

In this section, the finding from the document analysis of the flipped learning models developed by the school shows that the instructional principal worked closely with teachers to provide an overall flipped learning adoption model. The designed model had a significant impact on both pedagogical practice and administrative organisations of the school as shown in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2.

The overall model of the flipped classroom.

The flipped learning model adapted by the school was formulated in a schematic diagram by the instructional principal to show the overall structure of the flipped learning in the school-wide adoption. This model was co-created and applied by teachers in the classroom practice to guide their teaching, which was evidenced by another teacher participant, Kris:

We formed a research centre comprised of teachers from different subjects under the supervision of the school instructional principal. This research centre has a routine: every week, each teacher has a chance to give a teaching demonstration, and the other teachers observe and give feedback collectively with reflection. With this reflective journey, we modified and customized the models of flipped learning to fit our teaching and learning in our school…. it is constructive and learner-centred in nature…

Kris confirmed that the research centre was organised by the instructional principal and teachers harness the ownership of the research to design and modify the existing flipped learning models to inform the best teaching practice.

As shown in the diagram, it was co-created by teachers and instructional principal through the reflective practice in research and illustrates the macrostructure of the management system of the school for the implementation of flipped learning. There are two branches of development: inheritance and creation. The school decided to continue the good teaching traditions of teachers’ collective lesson-plan preparation, guidance in the designed case study, cooperative learning and students’ evaluation. In addition to this conservation, the school management team added new creative aspects to the new approach to teaching, building a new system that integrated hardware and teaching resources. Hardware included the digitalised learning platform, campus mirror server, gigabit campus network, classroom Wi-Fi and personal terminal learning (iPad). Teaching resources covered micro-lesson design (Instructional videos) and recording, lesson plans and other activities.

The overall flipped learning adoption model highlighted both teachers’ and students’ collaborative learning using technology support. Abbott and Faris (2000) stress that the foundation philosophy of technology integration relies on collaborative learning, problem-based learning, and the constructivist approach in the meeting of technology integrating challenges. The findings in this study also suggest that technology integration will not have the desired effect without student-centred classroom practices.

A model for instructional video making

Videos are often the main technological resources used in flipped learning. Schools can provide well-structured learning support for making instructional videos when integrating technology into curriculum and instruction materials (Hew and Brush, 2007). An individualised model in context can be a powerful tool for the facilitation of engaging pedagogies that maximise face-to-face time, moving students to higher order thinking and critical thinking (Bergmann and Sams, 2016). The school principal also co-designed the model of instructional video production with teachers (see Figure 3). In this school, the instructional video was called “Micro-class”.

Figure 3.

Micro-class recording approaches generated by the research center.

The above figure illustrates the approaches and procedures for making instructional videos for flipped learning. The instructional principal explained the procedures with underpinning beliefs:

Instructional videos are designed to teach specific content, skills or concepts, and teachers are experts on content knowledge. Therefore, they are capable of designing the instructions to address the students’ learning needs. The video that has been designed is expected to be popular with students and enhance students’ learning. For example, videos can facilitate learning by giving students control over the pace of instruction. Moreover, videos are also easily trackable for learning analytics when students log into Moodle systems. However, we also found that teachers’ hard work cannot guarantee that the videos are efficient and attractive to students, as many teachers are not good at video editing or designing; as a result, they simply transfer instructions to the screen. To address this question, we ask teachers to collaborate with a technology company who can assist them in advancing their skills. First, teachers design the instructions regarding the topic, focus, aims, and learning outcomes of the instructional videos. Second, the technology experts from the technology company help make the video more dynamic and animated to engage the students. The school provides financial support from the school budget to the company. This strategy has been working well so far.

Bergmann and Sams (2016) suggest that teachers themselves should make videos. However, with respect to this work, it is worth noting that teachers are experts in designing the lesson plans and instructional activities for the reason that they know students’ learning needs better than anyone else. This said, technology companies can provide technical support concerning creating animation content or cartoon episodes so that the instructional videos are more engaging. For example, in Figure 4, students watch animated videos collaboratively generated by teachers and a technology company on iPads in class:

Figure 4.

Students watching the instructional videos using the personal terminal devices –iPad.

The instructional principal oversees the whole technology integration process, instructional video-making and the uploading of videos. Personal terminal devices and charging carts are also important elements in the integration of technology in the classroom. In this school, frequent use of tablets required a charging cart in every classroom. The instructional principal worked with the technical team to design a “homemade” charging cart within the school’s limited budget. The school ordered customised carts and put patch panels in each classroom for student convenience and use so that they would have access to the school platform to watch the instructional videos uploaded by the teachers (see Figure 5):

Figure 5.

Customized carts and patch panels for charging iPads.

Staples et al. (2005) point out that good planning for technology integration requires a unique understanding of the specific hardware and software that relates to the requirements of the curriculum. In this study, the instructional principal worked closely with teachers to develop and design a model that would engage the teacher in the reform and transformation of their teaching practices, and build a school culture with a research climate that facilitate effective instructional reform involving technology integration. Developing a pedagogical and organisational model requires a strong link between theory and application such that teachers can be assisted in overcoming the obstacles they face when dealing with technology integration (KeenGwe et al., 2009).

Discussion

Leadership for learning incorporates an awareness that instructional leadership practices must be adapted to the nature and needs of the school’s particular context. Driven by the five main motives, the instructional principal understood the need to change leadership practice when adopting a school-wide flipped learning approach. However, flipped learning does not make teaching easier. Instead, it raises questions about making the best use of face-to-face time between teachers and students (Kirch, 2016). In this school, fully adopting the American model of the flipped classroom did not work without adaption in a Chinese educational context. The adoption of the flipped learning model needed to be customised to fit the school’s development concerning students’ learning needs, teachers’ professional learning needs and the school’s available resources.

In this school, the instructional principal worked closely with teachers to develop and design models to assist teachers in dealing with the changes that transforming teaching practices required, providing well-structured learning support when integrating technology into their curriculum and pedagogical approach (Burns et al., 2015). The developed model provided constant support for teachers when they engaged with different stages of the transformation process (KeenGwe et al., 2009). For example, the flipped learning model and the instructional video-producing model helped teachers’ professional development when engaging in reform and technology integration. This is to say, technology integration in education cannot be implemented in isolation. When applied in combination with diverse teaching methods and approaches, especially constructivist practices, learning outcomes are more likely to be achieved.

The teachers who are most effective at using flipped learning are thoughtful and reflective about their teaching practices in making the best use of the technology and resources in general (Kirch, 2016). This view is supported by Agyei (2021) who writes that schools need to employ new policies to involve teachers in decision-making and planning processes regarding incorporating technology into classrooms. In this school, the instructional principal invited teachers to share the leadership functions when engaging them in the reform process. The sharing of leadership practice minimised the teachers’ resistance to change. For example, Vivian gave very positive responses to the direct classroom supervision provided by the instructional principal. She indicated that the direct supervision in classroom practice improved her teaching skills. In addition, flipped learning is an umbrella concept for effective teaching, which is to say that there is no one-size-fits-all model available for quick dissemination and implementation (Leithwood and Jantzi, 2006). The instructional principal conducted research centre programmes in order to work with teachers closely in a subject unit. This helped teachers enhance their subject knowledge and develop their team leadership skills. Similarly, Hallinger (2010) advised that the distributed leadership can become, over time, a sustaining driver for school improvement. By taking independent and collaborative ownership of the transformation approach, teachers can become autonomous practitioners. The autonomous teacher practitioners are the most powerful legacy, which a school principal can contribute to a school for its sustainable development. Similarly, Ward and Parr (2010) clarify that teachers need to feel confident in facilitating students’ learning when integrating technology into their classrooms. In this study, it was noted that the principal utilised one-by-one scaffolding, when designing instructional activities with subject teachers, to facilitate their engagement and the development of their confidence when transforming this new pedagogy into classroom practice.

Leaders’ awareness and understanding of the forces that influence the life of a school are crucial to shaping the school community’s shared sense of vision in productive and inspiring ways (Hallinger, 2010). Specifically, in this study, the “free vegetable for teachers” policy was suggested to facilitate positive emotions in the school community during the school change. Instructional leaders who have a deep understanding of teacher learning can nurture teacher engagement in the change process by mobilising the school's available resources. Implementing effective teaching when pursuing a program of technology integration requires changes in teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and school culture (Brackett et al., 2012). Hargreaves (1998) explains that the emotions associated with teachers' resistance to educational change can be shifted on account of interactions with school leaders and peers. Such a shift can concern changes in such values as trust, support, involvement, commitment to teamwork, and willingness to experiment. Maslow et al. (1998) suggest that it was helpful to think of motivation as being related to the ultimate need for self-actualisation; for example, in this study, the instructional principal assisted one teacher in designing the instructional activities. With the help of the instructional principal in designing instructional activities, the teacher was eventually promoted as a subject leader. The promotion of the teacher made both the teacher's professional learning and career development dream come true. The self-actualisation, in turn, facilitates teacher engagement in practice and school teaching reform.

Conclusion

This paper reports on the perceptions of a school principal about the school-wide flipped learning adoption process in a Chinese school. Specifically, it explored how the school instructional principal initiated, conducted and adapted instructional reform requiring technology integration. The findings highlight that involving teachers as researchers is a powerful technique when attempting to implement successful instructional reform. The instructional principal’s lived experiences and philosophy of education contributed to the teachers’ commitment to the transformation process. The school needed to build a supportive pedagogical and organisational system to work closely with teachers in order to establish a continuous and collaborative learning culture. It also facilitates effectiveness for schools in China to provide some well-structured and customised learning support for teachers while integrating technology into their curriculum and instructions in schools.

The current research has limitations. Seeing the geographic variation in China, its small scale in sampling limited this study. The findings might not be transferable to other schools. Therefore, further investigations are needed to gain deeper insights into Chinese school principals’ perceptions of technology integration and factors that influence their instructional leadership practice. Future studies should involve more stakeholders (e.g., students, parents and policymakers from the Ministry of education). It is hoped that this study will stimulate interest of technology educators and serve to progress further research and development of similar programs in the future.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Support for this research was provided in part by the Research & Development Grant for Chair Professor of the University of Macau (CPG2023-00022-FED). The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the University of Macau, and no official endorsement should be inferred.

Code availability

N-vivo

Ethical statement

ORCID iD

Lina Guo

Data availability statement

The database is available for this research.

Details of the semi-structured interview protocol.

Participants	Questions
The instructional principal	• Could you please share your experiences in leading the school-wide flipped learning adoption process?
The instructional principal	• What’s your perceptions to be a successful school instructional leader in leading a school-wide flipped learning adoption process?
The teachers	• What and how do mediational factors influence your professional enactment the school-wide flipped learning adoption process?
The teachers	• What are your future concerns about professional enactment in the school-wide flipped learning adoption process?

Author Biographies

Lina Guo is an Assistant Professor at the Education School of Nottingham University in Malaysia. She obtained her PhD in Educational Technology from Waikato University in New Zealand. After completing her doctoral studies, she acquired 1 year of professional experience at Victoria University of Wellington, where she engaged in administrative tasks, teaching, and research before she joined Nottingham University in Malaysia in June 2023. Her specialization lies in leveraging Digital Technology and AI to enhance learning, teaching, and school management at both the school and tertiary levels. Dr. Guo possesses extensive experience conducting empirical research in various classroom settings, with a particular expertise in second language acquisition within TESOL. She is deeply passionate about fostering the cognitive and metacognitive development of learners, aiming to cultivate lifelong learning skills. (lina.guo@nottingham.edu.my)

Chuang Wang is Distinguished Professor at the Faculty of Education at the University of Macau. His expertise includes educational statistics and English language learner’s self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulated learning behaviours. (wangc@um.edu.mo)

P John Williams is Professor of Education and the Director of Graduate Research in the School of Education at Curtin University in Perth, Western Australia, where he teaches and supervises research students in STEM and technology education. Apart from Australia, he has worked and studied in New Zealand and the United States and a number of African and Indian Ocean countries. His current research interests include STEM, mentoring beginning teachers, PCK and electronic assessment of performance. (Pjohn.Williams@curtin.edu.au)

References

Abbott

Faris

(2000) Integrating technology into preservice literacy instructions a survey of elementary education students’ attitudes toward computers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33(2): 149–161.

Abdulrahaman

Faruk

Oloyede

, et al. (2020) Multimedia tools in the teaching and learning processes: a systematic review. Heliyon 6(11): e05312. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05312.

Agyei

(2021) Integrating ICT into schools in Sub-Saharan Africa: from teachers’ capacity building to classroom implementation. Education and Information Technologies 26(1): 125–144.

Almusawi

Durugbo

Bugawa

(2021) Innovation in physical education: teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Computers Education Information Technologies 167: 104185.

Ash

(2012) Educators evaluate flipped classrooms. Education Week 32(2): s6–s8.

Bamburg

Andrews

(1990) Instructional leadership, school goals, and student achievement: exploring the relationship between means and ends.

Bauer

Kenton

(2005) Toward technology integration in the schools: why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 13(4): 519–546.

Bergmann

Sams

(2012) Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. Washington DC: International Society for Technology in Education.

Bergmann

Sams

(2014) Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

10.

Bergmann

Sams

(2016) Flipped Learning for Elementary Instruction. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

11.

Boggs

Eyberg

(1990) Interview techniques and establishing rapport.

12.

Brackett

Reyes

Rivers

, et al. (2012) Assessing teachers’ beliefs about social and emotional learning. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 30(3): 219–236.

13.

Braun

Clarke

(2019) Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise health 11(4): 589–597.

14.

Burns

Warmbold-Brann

Zaslofsky

(2015) Ecological systems theory in school psychology review. School Psychology Review 44(3): 249–261.

15.

Cakir

(2012) Technology integration and technology leadership in schools as learning organizations. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET 11(4): 273–282.

16.

Carlson

(2010) Avoiding traps in member checking. Qualitative Report 15(5): 1102–1113.

17.

Chatterjee

Chaudhuri

Vrontis

, et al. (2020) Digital transformation and innovation in education: emerging markets case studies. Journal of Business Research 107: 334–347. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.08.011.

18.

Chuang

W eng

Chen

(2018) Which students benefit most from a flipped classroom approach to language learning? British Journal of Educational Technology 49(1): 56–68.

19.

Delialioglu

Yildirim

(2007) Students' perceptions on effective dimensions of interactive learning in a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 10(2): 133–146.

20.

Dexter

Richardson

(2020) What does technology integration research tell us about the flipped classroom model? A systematic review. Educational Technology Research & Development 68: 2525–2552. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-020-09844-x.

21.

Dogan

Celik

(2021) Teachers’ skills to integrate technology in education: two path models explaining instructional and application software use. Education and Information Technologies 26(1): 1311–1332.

22.

Fenwick

(2003) Learning through Experience: Troubling Orthodoxies and Intersecting Questions. Malabar, FL: Krieger.

23.

Foriska

(1994) The Principal as instructional leader: teaming with teachers for student success. Schools in the Middle 3(3): 31–34.

24.

Galindo

(2014) Blended learning in higher education: frameworks and guidelines. International Journal of Educational Technology 5(2): 85–97.

25.

Ghavifekr

Razak

AZA

Ghani

MFA

, et al. (2014) ICT integration in education: incorporation for teaching & learning improvement. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology 2(2): 24–45.

26.

Hall

Hord

(2001) Implementing Change: Patterns. Boston: Pearson.

27.

Hallinger

(2003) Leading educational change: reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education 33(3): 329–352.

28.

Hallinger

(2010) Developing instructional leadership. Developing Successful Leadership. Dordrecht: Springer, 61–76.

29.

Hallinger

Walker

Lee

(2020) A systematic review of research on educational leadership and management in South East Asia: a post-2010 analysis. Journal of Educational Administration 58(4): 401–420. DOI: 10.1108/JEA-12-2019-0218.

30.

Hargreaves

(1998) The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education.

31.

Hew

Brush

(2007) Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research & Development 55(3): 223–252.

32.

Holton

(2007) The coding process and its challenges. The Sage handbook of grounded theory 3: 265–289.

33.

Hosseingholizadeh

Tavakoli

Rahmani

(2020) Challenges of flipped classrooms in Iranian higher education: teachers' perspectives. Education and Information Technologies 25(5): 4317–4334. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-020-10185-6.

34.

Israel

(2014) Research Ethics and Integrity for Social Scientists: Beyond Regulatory Compliance. 2nd edition. London: Sage Publications.

35.

Jacot

Noren

Berge

(2014) The flipped classroom in training and development: fad or the future? Performance Improvement 53(9): 23–28. DOI: 10.1002/pfi.21438.

36.

Kaya

Adiguzel

(2021) Technology integration through evidence-based multimodal reflective professional training. Contemporary Educational Technology 13(4): ep323.

37.

KeenGwe

OnChwari

(2009) Technology and student learning: towards a learner-centered teaching model. AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal) 17(1): 11–22.

38.

Kirch

(2016) Flipping with Kirch: The Ups and Downs from inside My Flipped Classroom. New Berlin, WI: Bretzmann Group.

39.

Lee

Wallace

(2018) Flipped learning in the English as a foreign language classroom: outcomes and perceptions. Tesol Quarterly 52(1): 62–84.

40.

Leithwood

Jantzi

(2006) Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School effectiveness and school improvement 17(2): 201–227.

41.

Maslow

Stephens

Heil

(1998) Maslow on Management. New York: John Wiley.

42.

Miles

Fogget

(2016) Supporting our students to achieve academic success in the unfamiliar world of flipped and blended classrooms. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice 13(4): 2.

43.

Ministry of Education (MoE) . (2011) National strategy for higher education to 2030. Government of Country.

44.

Murphy

(1988) Methodological, measurement, and conceptual problems in the study of instructional leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 10(2): 117–139.

45.

Neufeld

Dong

Higgins

(2007) Charismatic leadership and user acceptance of information technology. European Journal of Information Systems 16(4): 494–510.

46.

Neumann

Somoza-Norton

(2021) Equity and inclusion in digital learning: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education 37(2): 98–109. DOI: 10.1080/21532974.2021.1880745.

47.

Neumerski

(2013) Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: what do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here? Educational Administration Quarterly 49(2): 310–347.

48.

Oke

Fernandes

FAP

(2020) Innovations in teaching and learning: exploring the perceptions of the education sector on the 4th industrial revolution (4IR). Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 6(2): 31. DOI: 10.3390/joitmc6020031.

49.

Ottenbreit-Leftwich

Glazewski

Newby

, et al. (2010) Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education 55(3): 1321–1335.

50.

O’Connor

(2012) Managing international schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 40(2): 242–252. DOI: 10.1177/1741143211433897.

51.

Patterson

Petty

Harwood

(2021) The use of digital technologies in teaching and learning: understanding teachers' readiness in higher education. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology 17(1): 4–15.

52.

Quinn

(2002) The impact of principal leadership behaviors on instructional practice and student engagement. Journal of Educational Administration 40(5): 447–467.

53.

Rabionet

(2011) How I learned to design and conduct semi-structured interviews: an ongoing and continuous journey. Qualitative Report 16(2): 563–566.

54.

Rapley

(2018) Doing Conversation, Discourse and Document Analysis. New Delhi: Sage.

55.

Sayyadi Ghasabeh

(2020) Leadership styles and organizational performance in the education sector: a case study. International Journal of Educational Management 34(3): 545–558. DOI: 10.1108/IJEM-01-2019-0010.

56.

Southworth

(2002) Instructional leadership in schools: reflections and empirical evidence. School Leadership & Management 22(1): 73–91.

57.

Spillane

Coldren

(2015) Diagnosis and design for school improvement: Using a distributed perspective to lead and manage change. New York: Teachers College Press.

58.

Staples

Pugach

Himes

(2005) Rethinking the technology integration challenge: cases from three urban elementary schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 37(3): 285–311.

59.

Sun

Gao

(2019) Exploring the impact of the flipped classroom model on students' engagement and achievement in language learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 50(1): 253–267. DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12615.

60.

Tezci

(2011) Factors that influence pre-service teachers’ ICT usage in education. European Journal of Teacher Education 34(4): 483–499.

61.

Tiba

Condy

(2021) Identifying factors influencing pre-service teacher readiness to use technology during professional practice. International Journal of Information 17(2): 149–161.

62.

Tondeur

Van Keer

Van Braak

, et al. (2008) ICT integration in the classroom: challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education 51(1): 212–223.

63.

Wang

(2017) An exploration of online behaviour engagement and achievement in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. Computers Education 114: 79–91.

64.

Wang

Tigelaar

DEH

Admiraal

(2022) From policy to practice: integrating ICT in Chinese rural schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 31(4): 509–524.

65.

Ward

Parr

(2010) Revisiting and reframing use: implications for the integration of ICT. Computers & Education 54(1): 113–122.

66.

Watts-Taffe

Gwinn

Johnson

, et al. (2003) Preparing preservice teachers to integrate technology with the elementary literacy program. The Reading Teacher 57(2): 130–138.

67.

Webb

Doman

(2016) Impacts of the flipped classroom on learner-centered education in ESL/EFL learning contexts. TESOL Journal 7(2): 226–249. DOI: 10.1002/tesj.204.

68.

Yang

CCR

(2017) An investigation of the use of the'flipped classroom'pedagogy in secondary English language classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice 16(1): 1–20.

69.

Yang

Chen

(2020) Students' perceptions of using flipped classrooms in English language learning: a mixed-methods study. Education and Information Technologies 25(4): 3179–3194. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-020-10115-6.

70.

Yurtseven Avci

O'Dwyer

Lawson

(2020) Designing effective professional development for technology integration in schools. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 36(2): 160–177.