I saw a news story today saying that some students cried because of the "flipped classroom." What exactly is a flipped classroom?

Simply put, in a traditional class, the teacher lectures and the students listen. A "flipped classroom" reverses that: students prepare the content first and then present it in class, while the teacher adds explanations and guidance from the side.

Oh, so "flipped" means switching the usual order of "teacher lectures, students listen." Then why would students cry?

Because some students are not well prepared and cannot explain things clearly, so the people listening below cannot understand. For some students, not only do they fail to learn the material, but they also feel a lot of pressure.

Now I understand. In other words, this method was originally meant to make students more proactive, but if it is not handled well, the class may work even worse.

Right. For example, in language classes or discussion-based classes, having students speak more may work quite well. But in classes with very difficult content, if the teacher explains too little, students can easily get confused.

So the problem is not the method of the "flipped classroom" itself, but whether it is used in the right context and whether the rules are explained clearly.

Exactly. Educational reform is not just about changing to a new name. What matters most is whether students can truly understand and learn. Only then does it have meaning.