Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course

International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 317-324

  Love, Betty ^a   Hodge, Angie ^a   Grandgenett, Neal ^a   Swift, Andrew W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

Author keywords

flipped classroom; inquiry based learning; linear algebra; student perceptions of instruction; teaching with technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 84894279223     PISSN: 0020739X     EISSN: 14645211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2013.822582     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. European Schoolnet. Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: defining the challenges. Brussels, Belgium: European Union's Framework Programme for Research and Development; 2011.
2. Asia Science Educator Academy. Action plans for Asia STEAM education. Paper presented at: Asia Science Educator Conference; 2011Nov 29 to Dec 2; Seoul, Korea.
3. Australian Council for Educational Research. Participation in science, mathematics and technology in Australian education. Camberwell, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research; 2008.
4. National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, and National Academy of Engineering. Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: rapidly approaching category 5. Written by Members of the 2005 "Rising Above the Gathering Storm" Committee. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2010.
5. National Science Board. National Science Board STEM Education recommendations for the president-elect Obama administration, NSB-0901. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation; 2009.
6. Royal Academy of Engineering. Jobs and growth: the importance of engineering skills to the UK economy. London: Royal Academy of Engineering econometrics of engineering skills project; 2012.
7. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. Building a science, technology, engineering and math education agenda: an update of state actions. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices; 2012.
8. Bergmann J, Sams A. Flip your classroom: reach every student in every class every day. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education; 2012.
9. Lage MJ, Platt G, Treglia M. Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. J Econ Educ. 2000;31:30-43.
10. Gannod GC, Burge JE, Helmick MT. Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering. Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '08), Leipzig, Germany. New York, NY: ACM; 2008; p. 777-786.
11. Deslauriers L, Schelew E, Wieman C. Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science. 2011;332:862-864.
12. Bates S, Galloway R. The inverted classroom in a large enrollment introductory physics course: a case study. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on the Aiming for Excellence in STEM Learning and Teaching; 2012; London.
13. Moravec M, Williams A, Aguilar-Roca N, O'Dowd DK. Learn before lecture: a strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2010;9:473-481.
14. Lord S, Camacho M. Effective teaching practices: preliminary analysis of engineering educators. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference; 2007 Oct 10-3; Milwaukee, WI.
15. Tucker B. The flipped classroom. Educ Next. 2012;12: 82-83.
16. Frand JL. The information-age mindset: changes in students and implications for higher education. EDUCAUSE Rev. 2000;35:14-25.
17. Kaner C, Fiedler RL. Inside out: a computer science course gets a makeover. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology International Conference; 2005; Orlando, FL.
18. Day J, Foley J. Evaluating a web lecture intervention in a human-computer interaction course. IEEE Trans Educ. 2006;49:420-431.
19. Carlisle MC. Using you tube to enhance student class preparation in an introductory Java course. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer science Education; 2010 Mar 10-13; Milwaukee, WI.
20. Mazur E. Peer instruction: a user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley; 1996.
21. Novak G, Gavrin A, Christian W, Patterson E. Just-in-time teaching: blending active learning with web technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley; 1999.
22. Carter P. An experience report: on the use of multimedia pre-instruction and just-in-time teaching in a CS1 course. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education; 2012 Feb 29-March 3; Raleigh, NC.
23. Andersen M. Back to the board. NISOD Innovation Abstracts XXVIII. Austin, TX: University of Texas College of Education; 2006.
24. Barker LJ, McDowell C, Kalahar K. Exploring factors that influence computer science introductory course students to persist in the major. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 2009;41:153-157.