Open Access
SHS Web of Conf.
Volume 174, 2023
2023 2nd International Conference on Science Education and Art Appreciation (SEAA 2023)
Article Number 01007
Number of page(s) 4
Section Educational Practice and Teaching Curriculum Reform
Published online 11 August 2023
  1. Kelly, P. Adam, et al. “A comparison of in-class learner engagement across lecture, problem-based learning, and team learning using the STROBE classroom observation tool.” Teaching and learning in medicine 17.2 (2005): 112-118. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Remedios, Louisa, David Clarke, and Lesleyanne Hawthorne. “Framing collaborative behaviors: Listening and speaking in problem-based learning.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 2.1 (2008): 1-20. [Google Scholar]
  3. Trinter, Christine P., Tonya R. Moon, and Catherine M. Brighton. “Characteristics of students’ mathematical promise when engaging with problem-based learning units in primary classrooms.” Journal of Advanced Academics 26.1 (2015): 24-58. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Li, Hui-Chuan, and Tsung-Lung Tsai. “The implementation of problem-based learning in a Taiwanese primary mathematics classroom: lessons learned from the students’ side of the story.” Educational Studies 43.3 (2017): 354-369. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Tang, Shifang, et al. “A comparative study of problem-based learning and traditional approaches in college English classrooms: Analyzing pedagogical behaviors via classroom observation.” Behavioral Sciences 10.6 (2020): 105. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Saarinen-Rahiika, Helen, and Jill M. Binkley. “Problem-based learning in physical therapy: a review of the literature and overview of the McMaster University experience.” Physical Therapy 78.2 (1998): 195-207. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Stearns, Linda M., et al. “A teacher observation instrument for PBL classroom instruction.” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research 13.3 (2012): 7. [Google Scholar]
  8. Van Tassel‐Baska, Joyce, Chwee Quek, and Annie Xuemei Feng. “The development and use of a structured teacher observation scale to assess differentiated best practice.” Roeper Review 29.2 (2006): 84-92. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Capraro, Robert M., et al. “Impact of sustained professional development in STEM on outcome measures in a diverse urban district.” The Journal of Educational Research 109.2 (2016): 181-196. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. James, Lawrence R., Robert G. Demaree, and Gerrit Wolf. “Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias.” Journal of applied psychology 69.1 (1984): 85. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. O’Malley, Kimberly J., et al. “Validation of an observation instrument for measuring student engagement in health professions settings.” Evaluation & the health professions 26.1 (2003): 86-103. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lara-Alecio, Rafael, and Richard I. Parker. “A pedagogical model for transitional English bilingual classrooms.” Bilingual Research Journal 18.3-4 (1994): 119-133. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Von Elm, Erik, et al. “The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.” The Lancet 370.9596 (2007): 1453-1457. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Von Elm, Erik, et al. “The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.” International journal of surgery 12.12 (2014): 1495-1499. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Barrows, Howard S., and Robyn M. Tamblyn. Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. Vol. 1. Springer Publishing Company, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  16. Miles, Matthew B., and A. Michael Huberman. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  17. Sheffield, Linda Jensen. Extending the challenge in mathematics: Developing mathematical promise in K-8 students. Corwin Press, 2002. [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.