Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33659757›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2021

Gamification and flipped learning and their influence on aspects related to the teaching-learning process.

Ma Elena Parra-González, Jesús López-Belmonte, Adrián Segura-Robles, Antonio-José Moreno-Guerrero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Spanish Adaptation and Validation of the Teaching and Learning Experiences Questionnaire.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  11. Adaptation and Validation of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire for Spanish Adolescents.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ma Elena Parra-GonzálezDepartment of Research Methods and Diagnosis in Education, University of Granada, Spain.
Jesús López-BelmonteDepartment of Didactics and School Organization, University of Granada, Spain.
Adrián Segura-RoblesDepartment of Research Methods and Diagnosis in Education, University of Granada, Spain.
Antonio-José Moreno-GuerreroDepartment of Didactics and School Organization, University of Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nowadays, education is going through a moment of methodological transformation. Two of the active methodologies with excellent projection within the educational field are gamification and flipped learning. This study analyzed the methodological contrast between gamification and flipped learning in the subject of Physical Education in three different educational stages to determine the most influential methodology in the training process. Research design was a quasi-experimental research with a sample of 356 students in Spain. Data collection took place with a questionnaire. The results show that gamification as a teaching and learning methodology is better valued at an early stage, while the more aged participants better value the flipped learning methodology. Both methodologies have shown great potential in the development of educational processes in Physical Education. Gamification indeed seems to have positive effects on students from the lower stages. On the other hand, flipped learning produces positive effects on the group stages, pre-university students.

Indexed as

Academic improvementsActive methodologiesPhysical educationTeaching innovation

Identifiers

PMID33659757
PMCPMC7892912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.