University Mathematics for Engineers: Towards Optimum Compromise between Interactive and Traditional Approaches
https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-7-22-31
Abstract
The article examines two ways to achieve mastery of undergraduate mathematics: face-to- face and digital learning formats. The authors have developed and tested a unique interactive computer-based learning software – few local programs to practice math online, offline or to be installed into an e-course. We focus on different standard problems, such as, finding determinants, solving differential equations, integration by parts, etc. The aim of this study was to investigate what kinds of the activities lead to good learning outcomes. To date, much of the previous research has suggested that students get the benefits of e-learning and b-learning. Yet, there is a general lack of research on outcomes compares the different ways in which students gain knowledge. The results show that the interactive math simulator is one of the effective tools for developing skills to solve standard problems of higher mathematics. There are, however, some math problems to be learn traditionally, with textbook and chalkboard.
About the Authors
E. A. Beliauskene
National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Evgeniia A. Beliauskene - Senior Lecturer, Mathematics and Computer Science department
Address: 30, Lenin Ave., Tomsk, 603950
O. N. Imas
National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga N. Imas - Cand. Sci. (Phys.-Math.), Assoc. Prof., Mathematics and Computer Science department
Address: 30, Lenin Ave., Tomsk, 603950
S. V. Kriviakov
National Research Tomsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Stanislav V. Kriviakov - Cand. Sci. (Economics), Assoc. Prof., Economics department
Address: 30, Lenin Ave., Tomsk, 603950
E. V. Tsareva
EleSy Company
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena V. Tsareva - programmer
Address: Altaiskaya str., 161 А, 634021, Tomsk
References
1. Voitovich, I.K. (2016). University e-Learning Environment Model. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. No. 12, pp. 82-87. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
2. Gnutova, I.I. (2020). From Flipped Classroom to Flipped Learning: Evolution of the Concept and Its Philosophical Foundations. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. Vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 86-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-3-86-95 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
3. Buchan, J. (2010). Putting Ourselves in the Big Picture: A Sustainable Approach to Project Management for E-Learning. Journal of distance education. Vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 55-76. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ892356
4. Tatsuoka, K.K. (1993). Item Construction and Psychometric Models Appropriate for Constructed Response. Prinston, N-J., 56 p.
5. Safonov, V.I., Bakaeva, O.A., Tagaeva, E.A. (2019) Potential Capabilities of the Geogebra Interactive Environment During the Implementation of the Continuity of the “School-University” Mathematical Education. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovaniya = Perspectives of Science and Education. Vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 431-444. DOI: 10.32744/pse.2019.1.32. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
6. Rozhkova, O.V., Netesova, M.V., Ustinova, I.G. (2017). Innovative Technologies in Applied Mathematical Sciences as a Factor of Quality Improvement of Engineers’ Training. In: 10th Annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation: Proceedings, Seville, 16-18 November 2017. Barcelona: IATED, pp. 3263-3272 [243706-2018].
7. Lobregat-Gómez, N., Mínguez, F., Roselló, M.-D., Sánchez, R., Luis, M.. (2015) Blended Learning Activities Development. In: International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 20-24 September 2015, Florence, Italy, 2015, pp. 79-81.
8. Avanesov, V.S. (2002). Kompozitsii testovykh zadanii [Test Composition]. Moscow: Testing Center under the RF Ministry of Education, 240 p. Available at: https://hum.edu-lib.com/pedagogikapsihologiya/avanesov-v-s-kompozitsiya-testovyih-zadaniy-onlayn (In Russ.)
9. Berk, R.A. (Ed). (1984). A Guide to Criterion-Referenced Test Construction. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
10. Aslanov, R.M. (2015). Simulator for Differential Equations on the Basis of Wolfram cdf Player. Sibirskii pedagogicheskii zhurnal = Siberian Pedagogical Journal. No. 4, pp. 26-30. Available at: http://sp-journal.ru/article/1721 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
11. Anisimov, A.L., Bondarenko, T.A., Kameneva, G.A. (2019). Development of Modern Test Materials Using the LaTeX Package for the Organization of Students’ Independent Work in the Study of Higher Mathematics. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovaniy = Perspectives of Science and Education. Vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 428-441. DOI: 10.32744/pse.2019.2.32 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
12. Borisov, S.I. (2004). Simulator Presentation Language for Solving Problems in Higher Mathematics. Otkrytoe i distantsionnoe obrazovanie = Open and Distance Education. No. 4, pp. 57-69. (In Russ.)
13. Yarikov, V.V. (2011). Simulator for Finding the Complex Function Antiderivative for the Kind of Integral P(x)Q(x). Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii i obshchestvo = Educational Technology and Society. Vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 368-376. Available at: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=17240156 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).
14. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15. Biggs, J. (2001). Enhancing Learning: A Matter of Style or Approach. In: Sternberg, R.J., Zhang, L. Perspectives on Thinking, Learning and Cognitive Styles. New York: Erlbaum, pp. 73-102.
Review
Views:
774
Email this article 