Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 42, 2018
Global Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning in Education (GC-TALE 2017)
Article Number 00116
Number of page(s) 15
Published online 29 January 2018
  1. Albert, D.L., 2016. Teaching Critical and Creative Thinking Skills Through Problem-Solivng in High School Mathematics Classes. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, D.E., Donham, R.S. & Bernhardt, S.A., 2011. Problem-based learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (128), pp.21–29. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Arends, R.I., 2012. Learning to Teach. 9th ed, [Google Scholar]
  4. Bloom, B.S. et al., 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I Cognitive Domain. New York, 16, p.207. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bono, E. De, 2015. Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step, Available at: [Google Scholar]
  6. Caine, R.N.C. and G., 1995. Reinventing Schools Through Brain-Based Learning. Educational Leadership, pp.43–47. [Google Scholar]
  7. Diener, M.L. et al., 2016. Socioemotional Correlates of Creative Potential in Preschool Age Children: Thinking Beyond Student Academic Assessments. Creativity Research Journal, 28(4), pp.450–457. Available at: [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Eagleton, S. & Muller, A., 2011. Development of a model for whole brain learning of physiology. AJP: Advances in Physiology Education, 35(4), pp.421–426. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Guilford, J.P. & Christensen, P.R., 1973. The one-way relation between creative potential and IQ. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 7, pp.247–252. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hmelo-silver, C.E., 2013. Creating a Learning Space in Problem-based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 7(1), pp.24–39. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hong, J. et al., 2014. Computers & Education Using a " prediction – observation – explanation " inquiry model to enhance student interest and intention to continue science learning predicted by their Internet cognitive failure. Computers & Education, 72, pp.1–11. Available at: [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kauchak, D. & Eggen, P., 2013. Education Psychology Windows on Classrooms_Ninth edition Ninth Edit., United States of America: Peachpit Press. [Google Scholar]
  13. Lederman, J.S. et al., 2014. Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry - The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), pp.65–83. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lehtinen, A., 2016. Guidance Provided by Teacher and Simulation for Inquiry-Based Learning : a Case Study. Journal of Science Education and Technology. Available at: [Google Scholar]
  15. LIN, C.-C. & BRUCE, B.C., 2013. Engaging Youth in Underserved Communities Through Digital-Mediated Arts Learning Experiences for Community Inquiry. Studies in Art Education, 54(4), pp.335–348. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Lin, W.-L. & Shih, Y.-L., 2016. Designing EEG Neurofeedback Procedures to Enhance Open-ended versus Closed-ended Creative Potentials. Creativity Research Journal, 28(4), pp.458–466. Available at: [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Moreno, R., 2013. Educational Psychology. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), pp.1689–1699. [Google Scholar]
  18. Nuttariya, K.-O. et al., 2012. Designing Framework of Multimedia Learning Environment to Enhance Problem Solving Transfer. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, pp.3421–3425. Available at: [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Osgood-Campbell, E., 2015. Investigating the educational implications of embodied cognition: A model interdisciplinary inquiry in mind, brain, and education curricula. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(1), pp.3–9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Soltis, R. et al., 2015. Process-oriented guided inquiry learning strategy enhances students' higher level thinking skills in a pharmaceutical sciences course. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 79(1), p.11. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Wijnia, L. et al., 2016. University teacher judgments in problem-based learning: Their accuracy and reasoning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, pp.203–212. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.