4.5 Review

Toward a set of design principles for mathematics flipped classrooms: A synthesis of research in mathematics education

期刊

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH REVIEW
卷 22, 期 -, 页码 50-73

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.002

关键词

Flipped classroom; Inverted classroom; Mathematics education; Statistics education; Teaching approach

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper analyzed the journal publications of mathematics flipped classroom studies in K-12 and higher education contexts. We focused specifically on a set of flipped classroom studies in which pre-class instructional videos were provided prior to face-to-face class meetings. We examined the following four major issues: (a) the types of out-of-class and in-class instructional activities used, (b) the effect of flipped learning on student achievement, (c) the participant perceptions of flipped classroom benefits, and (d) the main challenges of flipped classroom implementations. A meta-analysis of 21 comparison studies showed an overall significant effect in favor of the flipped classroom over the traditional classroom for mathematics education (Hedges' g = 0.298, 95% CI [0.16, 0.44]), with no evidence of publication bias. A broader research synthesis of 61 studies revealed that the flipped classroom approach benefited student learning in three main aspects: increasing in-class time for task/practice, integrating new knowledge with existing beliefs, and real-time feedback. The two most frequently reported flipped classroom challenges were students' unfamiliarity with flipped learning and significant start-up effort on the part of instructors. We hence propose a set of design principles to help foster the transition to the flipped classroom and improve the out-of-class and in-class learning designs. This set of design principles can also provide a more focused agenda for future research to examine the effect of the flipped classroom approach on student learning and motivation. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据