Purpose/Hypothesis : Flipping, an emergent teaching method whereby students listen to online lectures and complete other assignments outside of class, has been shown to be just as effective as traditional lecture in physical therapy education. However, there may be concern regarding student accountability related to the assignments given outside of class. Team-based learning (TBL) is a special type of group learning whereby student accountability is demonstrated through the readiness assurance process in both an individual and group format. Students are required to complete assignments outside of class and be ready to contribute to learning in the group environment. This instructional strategy may assist with improving student accountability in a flipped classroom. Therefore, the purpose of this presentation is to compare outcomes of students) in a musculoskeletal clinical science course who were exposed to 3 different teaching methods: 1. traditional lecture (TR), 2. ÒFlippedÓ teaching method (FL), and 3. ÒFlippedÓ teaching method with integration of TBL (FL+TBL).Number of Subjects : This study was a retrospective analysis of data collected on 83 doctoral physical therapy students, divided into three cohorts, who received TR (n=23), FL (n=30), or FL+TBL (n=30).Materials/Methods : The content covered in each class cohort was identical, regardless of instructional method. Our primary outcome measures were studentsÕ knowledge retention on the written exam questions which were same across instructional methods. Exam questions were categorized based on content areas (elbow/wrist/hand and hip/knee), physical therapy practice areas (evaluation/examination or interventions), and cognitive based level (lower versus higher level thinking). Percentage scores on the exam questions were calculated in each of these areas. An ANCOVA (SPSS) was used to compare the three instructional strategies in each of the calculated areas after controlling for admission standards (GRE and GPA).Results : When comparing TR to FL+TBL, students who received FL+TBL performed significantly higher on lower level thinking questions (p=0.008) than those who received TR. A trend was also noted in examination/evaluation question (p=0.057) when comparing FL+TBL and TR. There was no significant difference in knowledge retention between the FL and FL+TBL (p>0.05).Conclusions : Integrating two active learning strategies (FL+TBL) produced significantly greater short-term student knowledge retention when compared to TR. In addition, FL+TBL was just as effective as FL in promoting knowledge retention.Clinical Relevance : Utilizing TBL in a ÒFlippedÓ classroom may assist instructors with improving student accountability of outside class assignments while still improving studentsÕ knowledge retention.