Inquiry-Based Learning and the Flipped Classroom Model

REFERENCES

• Bloom, B. S., M. D. Engelhard, E. J. Furst, W. H. Hill, and D. R. Krathwohl. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Chalice, D. 1995. How to teach a class by the modified Moore method, American Mathematics Monthly. 104(4): 317–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crouch, C. H., J. Watkins, A. P. Fagen, and E. Mazur. 2007. Peer Instruction Engaging Students one-on-one, all at once. Physics. 9(9): 1–55.
   Google Scholar
• Eckerdal, A. 2009. Novice Programming Students’ Learning of Concepts and Practise. Ph.D. thesis, Upsalla, Sweden, Upsalla University.
   Google Scholar
• Flipped Learning Network. Definition of Flipped Learning. http://flippedlearning.org/domain/46. Accessed 3 August 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Foertsch, J., G. Moses, J. Strikwerda, and M. Litzkow. 2002. Reversing the Lecture homework paradigm using eTEACH web-based streaming video software. Journal of Engineering Education. 91(3): 267–274.
   Google Scholar
• Gannod, G. C., J. E. Burge, and M. T. Helmick. 2008. Using the Inverted classroom to teach software engineering. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 30th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 777–786.
   Google Scholar
• Goodell, J. 2000. Learning to teach mathematics for understanding: The role of reflection. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Goos, M. 2005. A sociocultural analysis of the development of pre-service and beginning teachers’ pedagogical identities as users of technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. 8(1): 35–59.
   Google Scholar
• Hadjerrouit, S. 2008. Towards a blended learning model for teaching and learning computer programming: A case study. Informatics in Education. 7(2): 181–210.
   Google Scholar
• Hanks, B., S. Fitzgerald,R. McCauley, L. Murphy, and C. Zander. 2011. Pair programming in education: a literature review. Computer Science Education. 21(2): 135–173.
   Google Scholar
• Hodge, A., B. Love, N. Grandgenett, and A. W. Swifts. 2014. A flipped classroom approach: Benefits and challenges of flipping the learning of procedural knowledge. In P. R. Lowenthal, C. S. Yorkhand, and L. C. Richardson, (eds), Online Learning: Common Misconceotions, Benefits and Challenges. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 49–60.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, L., and J. Renner. 2012. Effect of the flipped classroom model on secondary computer applications course: Student and teacher perceptions, questions and student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Louisville, KY, University of Louisville.
   Google Scholar
• Lage, M., G. Piatt, and M. Treglia. 2000. Inverting the classroom: A gateway of creating an inclusive leafhing environment. The Journal of Economic Education 31(1): 30–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laursen, S. L., M. Hassi, M. Kogan, A. Hunter, and T. Weston. 2011. Evaluation of the IBL mathematics project: Student and instructor outcomes of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics, Assessment & Evaluation Center for Inquiry-Based Learning in Mathematics, University of Colorado, Ethnography & Evaluation Research.
   Google Scholar
• Love, B., A. Hodge, N. Grandgenett, and A. W. Swift. 2014. Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 45(3): 317–324.
   Google Scholar
• Mahavier, W. 1999. What is the Moore method?. PRIMUS. 9:339–254.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, H. W., and A. DeCapu. 2013. Making the Transition to Classroom Success: Culturally Responsive Teaching for Struggling Language Learner. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Novak, G. M., A. Gavrin, W. Christian, and E. Patterson. 1999. Just-in-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Pacheco, A., A. Gomes, J. Henriques, A. de Almeida, and A. Mendes. 2008. Mathematics and Programming: Some Studies. In Proceedings of the Internation Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies.
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulos, C., A. S. Roman. 2010. Implementing and inverted class room model in engineering statics: Initial results. In Proceedings of the 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Poll Anywhere, http://pollanywhere.com. Accessed 3 August 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, A. CMSC 436: Programming handheld systems. Accessed 24 December 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Reichheld, F. 2003. The one number you need to grow. Harvard Business Review. 8(12): 46–55.
   Google Scholar
• Robins, A., J. Rountree, and N. Rountree. 2003. Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education. 13(2): 137–172.
   Google Scholar
• Sams, A., and J. Bergmann. 2012. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
   Google Scholar
• Schneiderman, B. 1998. Relate-create-donate: A teaching learning philosophy for the Cyber-Generation, Computers & Education. 31(1): 25–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warter-Perez, N., and J. Dong. 2102. Flipping the classroom: How to embed inquiry and design projects into a digital engineering lecture. In Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE PSW Section Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, S., and V. Rajlich. 2004. Cognitive processes during debugging. In Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics.
   Google Scholar