This dissertation investigates the impact of self-paced learning on the understanding of Egyptian architecture among second-year Bachelor of Architecture students. It compares the effectiveness of self-paced learning to traditional teaching methods through an experimental design involving two groups of 80 students, analyzing their test scores and survey responses to evaluate learning outcomes. The findings aim to enhance architectural education by demonstrating that self-paced learning may improve students' knowledge and skills in complex subjects like Egyptian architecture.

1. DISSERTATION REPORT
ON
Evaluating the Impact of Self-Paced Learning : A Case Study on Egyptian Architecture in
B.Arch. 2nd
year
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE
3rd
semester
SUBMITTED BY
SHWETA CHOUDHARY
GUIDED BY
Ar. MOHAMMAD AMIR KHAN
Ar. BUSHRA FATIMA
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE
FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE AND EKISTICS
DELHI 110025
2024-2025

2. Aim:
 This research aims to investigate how self-paced learning influences the
understanding of Egyptian architecture among second-year Bachelor of
Architecture students.
Objectives:
 To study about self-paced learning in architecture education through
literature study.
 To conduct an experiment on self-paced learning method and traditional
teaching method among 2nd
year students.
 To compare the effectiveness of self-paced learning versus traditional
teaching methods in enhancing knowledge between students.
Need of the Study:
 Egyptian architecture is an important part of architectural education, but
students often struggle with memorizing facts, understanding design
principles, and applying them. Traditional methods may not give students
enough time to deeply learn these concepts. Self paced learning can help
students take the time they need to fully understand Egyptian architecture,
improving both their knowledge and design skills.

3. Historical Background:
 Self-paced learning has been used in various educational settings,
especially in science and engineering fields. Research shows that it can
help students learn complex concepts at their own speed, giving them
more time to practice and understand material. Inverted classroom
methods, where students study on their own and use class time for
practical work, have shown good results in improving student
performance. In architectural education, where history and design are
equally important, allowing students to learn at their own pace could be
helpful. Egyptian architecture, with its unique characteristics, needs
careful study and understanding, making it a good subject for testing self
paced learning.
Hypothesis:
 Students using self paced learning will have a better understanding of
Egyptian architecture compared to students following traditional
classroom instruction.
Research Questions:
1. Does self paced learning improve students' knowledge of Egyptian
architecture compared to traditional learning?

4. Methodology:
Aim: This research aims to
investigate how self-paced learning
influences the understanding of
Egyptian architecture among
second-year Bachelor of
Architecture students.
Primary Study:
Participants: 80 2nd
year B.Arch
students from the History of
architecture class from Day and
SFS batch
Group 1: Self paced learning group.
Students will be given video tutorials
and step-by-step guides on perspective
and rendering techniques. They will
work on their assignments at their
own speed, using these resources.
Group 2: Traditional learning group.
Students will attend regular
classroom sessions where the teacher
will take lecture
Final test : After 1 week
from the study, both groups
will engage in a test on
Egyptian Architecture
Secondary Study:
Literature review
Case studies
Methodology:

5. Experimental Design:
Title: Self Paced Learning in Architectural Drawing: An
Experiment in First Year Art and Graphics Class
Aim: This research
aims to investigate
how self-paced
learning influences
the understanding of
Egyptian architecture
among second-year
Bachelor of
Architecture students.
Participants: 80 2nd
year
B.Arch students from the
History of architecture class
from Day and SFS batch
Self Paced Group: Students
access video tutorials and
learning resources to study
drawing techniques at their
own speed.
Traditional Group: Students
will attend regular classroom
sessions where the teacher will
take lecture
Final test : After 1 week
from the study, both
groups will engage in a
test on Egyptian
Architecture
Data Collection: test
scores will be compared .
Students will also
complete a short survey to
assess their confidence
and experience
Data Analysis:
Compare the
improvement between
the selfpaced learning
group and the
traditional learning
group..
Survey Results: Analyze
the student surveys to
understand how confident
students felt about their
learning process in each
group.
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 6
Step 7
Experimental Design:

6. TIMELINE OF EXPERIMENT:
 Day 1:
 Students will be divided into two groups: the self-paced learning group and
the traditional learning group. The study will be introduced to all
participants.
 Self-Paced Learning Group:
 This group will watch video tutorials and practice at their own pace.
 Traditional Learning Group:
 Students in this group will attend regular classroom sessions focused on
Egyptian architecture.
 After One Week:
 Both groups will engage in a test on Egyptian architecture to assess their
understanding and retention of the material.
 Comparison of Results: The improvement in knowledge will be
compared between the self-paced learning group and the traditional
learning group.
 Data Analysis: Data will be analysed using a rubric to evaluate the
results and assess learning outcomes.
 Survey Questionnaire: A survey questionnaire will be distributed to all
students to gather additional insights on their learning experiences.
 Data Analysis and Report Preparation: Final data analysis will be
conducted, and a comprehensive report will be prepared to summarize the
findings of the experiment.

7. LITERATURE REVIEW

8. 1. A STUDY OF SELF-REGULATED LEARNING IN LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIOS, MATTHEW N. POWERS,
2006
Intent: The study aims to explore how self-regulated learning (SRL) influences students’ performance and
achievement in landscape architecture design studios. It seeks to understand how students self-regulate their
learning and performance on studio projects.
The objectives of this study are:
 To identify the different types of self-regulated learning (SRL) that students in landscape architecture studios
use.
 To understand how students manage their learning and performance on studio projects through self-
regulation.
 To explore how self-regulated learning differs based on the academic level of the students.
 To investigate the factors that influence students' ability to engage in self-regulated learning, such as goal-
setting, self-monitoring, interaction with peers and professors, motivation, and the studio environment.
 To determine why some students engage in self-regulated learning while others do not.
 To examine the relationship between self-regulated learning and student success.
 To explore the intervention strategies educators can use to improve students' self-regulated learning skills.
 To contribute new insights to the existing knowledge on self-regulated learning in landscape architecture
education.

9. Methodology :The methodology explains how the study will collect data, mainly through interviews, which are a
flexible way to learn more about students' experiences. It acknowledges that qualitative research has some
challenges, like being more subjective and having smaller groups of participants. However, the benefits, such as
getting deep and detailed information, are considered more important. Overall, the methods fit well with the
study's goal of understanding how students manage their own learning in design studios. It shows a careful and
well-planned research approach.
RESEARCH DESIGN: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
Participant Selection: The study involved 21
undergraduate landscape architecture students
from Virginia Tech. Participants were chosen
based on their academic year and achievement
level to provide diverse insights into self-
regulated learning (SRL).
Semi-standardized interviews were conducted,
allowing for flexibility and probing to gather in-
depth information. Interviews lasted between
25 and 45 minutes and were recorded for
accuracy.
Data Analysis: The data was analyzed
using grounded theory and open-coding.
This involved reading and re-reading
transcripts to identify themes and patterns
related to SRL behaviors and strategies.
The analysis aimed to develop a theoretical
framework explaining the relationship between
design learning and SRL, focusing on how these
factors influence student achievement in design
studios.

10. The Semi-Standardized
Interview Guide:
The scheduled questions in bold
provided a consistent framework,
ensuring that all key topics related
to self-regulated learning (SRL) were
covered across all interviews. This
consistency is essential for
comparing responses and identifying
common themes.

11. Final results:
 of the study reveal several key findings about self-regulated learning (SRL) among landscape architecture
students:
 Self-Regulated Learning Process: Landscape architecture students practice SRL by tackling design
challenges, creating a cycle where each issue leads to new challenges that require further SRL. This ongoing
process is essential for their learning and performance.
 Impact of Understanding Design: The students’ ability to self-regulate is closely tied to their perception of
design as a complex task. Those with a deeper understanding tend to achieve higher success, particularly
when they are given the freedom to explore beyond basic project requirements.
 Differences by Academic Year: The study found that students from different academic years have distinct
concerns and employ various SRL strategies based on their familiarity with the design process. This variation
highlights the evolving nature of students' learning approaches as they progress through their studies.
 Implications for Educators: The insights gained from this study can help design educators create effective
teaching strategies that enhance SRL, ultimately improving learning outcomes in design studios. This
emphasis on SRL can lead to better student engagement and achievement in landscape architecture
education.

12. 2. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN TEACHERS AND
STUDENTS IN THE , MILLENNIAL ERA TO CREATE STUDENTS’
SELF REGULATION CAPABILITY IN LEARNING
EMILIA RAMADHANI , 2019
Intent:
 The paper aims to explore effective communication between teachers and students
to enhance self-regulation in learning among high school students in Sumatra
Utara.
Objectives:
 To clearly state the problem or question the study aims to address
 To describe the methods and procedures used to conduct the research.
 To summarize the key results and discoveries from the research.
 To explain the significance of the findings and how they contribute to the field.
Methodology: The study involved training teachers in three high schools using the
Enneagram method to understand student behavior and improve communication. Data
was collected through observations and interviews during the training.

13. PROCESS
 This research focused on developing and improving communication methods between
teachers and students in high schools in Sumatra Utara Province. It was designed as a
long-term project lasting two years and included several stages: exploration, testing,
evaluation, and revision of the communication model.
 The research was conducted in three high schools: SMA Negeri 1 Kisaran, SMA Negeri 1
Medan, and SMA Negeri 1 Binjai. These schools were chosen based on their location in
both small towns and larger cities, and because they are popular public schools. The study
focused on both students and certified teachers, with the goal that all certified teachers
would participate in training focused on communication skills using the Enneagram
method. This training was seen as essential for improving how teachers interact with
students.
 The study built on previous research, aiming to apply and further develop an effective
communication model between teachers and students. The research steps included:
 Training teachers to use the communication model, which is based on understanding
behavior, at the selected schools.
 Monitoring and evaluating the training process.
 Revising the communication model based on feedback.

14. PROCESS
 Data was collected through observations and interviews. Observations allowed the
researchers to see the training in action, while interviews helped gather feedback on its
effectiveness from the participants.
 The researchers analyzed the data qualitatively by assessing how active the participants
were during the training and reviewing their feedback.
 The main focus of the training was to teach teachers how to listen effectively and
understand students' personalities using the Enneagram method. The goal was to help
teachers foster self-regulated learning (SRL) in students. SRL refers to students’ ability to
manage their own learning by controlling their thoughts, emotions, and behavior to reach
their learning goals.
 Many teachers found the concept of self-regulated learning easy to apply and believed it
could positively impact student learning styles. They also found the Enneagram method
useful for improving communication with their students.

15. Outcome:
 The study concluded that the Effective Communication Model based on behavioral
understanding was very effective in recognizing students’ learning styles and
enhancing their self-regulation capabilities.
Inferences:
 The paper suggests that behavior-based communication, particularly through the
Enneagram method, enhances teacher-student interactions and helps develop Self-
Regulated Learning (SRL) in students. Teachers found SRL concepts easy to apply
and beneficial for influencing student learning styles. Continuous training and
feedback are essential for refining communication models and improving learning
outcomes.

16. 3. SELF-REGULATED LEARNING OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
PROFESSIONALS IN TAIWAN, HUI-CHUN CHUANG
Intent:
The paper aims to understand how architectural design professionals in Taiwan engage
in self-regulated learning (SRL) to continuously improve their expertise amidst increasing
work pressures and evolving industry demands.
Process:
 This study designed a questionnaire from a meta-cognitive perspective of individuals’
learning process or how they learn.
 Research tool: The research tool used in this study is the “Questionnaire on SRL of
Architectural Design Professionals,”
 The questionnaire is first examined by experts for content validity, in which 51
questionnaires were issued and collected to test reliability and validity.
 The questionnaire was then randomly issued to 200 architectural design professionals
working in architect office in Taipei City, of which 171 effective questionnaires were
collected
 The attitude and general condition of architectural design professionals with respect to
Self-Regulated Learning is examined from three perspectives: personal, behavior, and
environment.

17.  Evaluation of SRL of Specialized Knowledge at Work Items of the questionnaire
related to specialized work of architectural design are designed based on the three
key factors of SRL, namely individual, behavior, and environment. Items are
evaluated on a five-point scale, in which 1.strongly disagree, 2.disagree, 3.sometimes
agree, 4.agree, and 5.strongly agree.
Final Outcome:
 Key Findings: Professionals actively learn new specialties but lack perseverance
and planning skills. They rely on discussions with colleagues and hands-on
operations but need better systematic learning approaches.
 Recommendations: Educational institutions should focus on collaboration, plan
formulation, and SRL skills to better prepare professionals for the dynamic
architectural field.

18. 4. OPTIMIZING CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION THROUGH SELF-
PACED LEARNING PROTOTYPE
JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE EDUCATION, ROMIRO
G. BAUTSTA, RECEIVED FEBRUARY 2015, ACCEPTED APRIL 2015
 Intent: The main goal of this study was to see if using a special self-paced
learning method could help students learn chemistry better. The researchers
wanted to find out if students who learn at their own speed do better in class
compared to students who follow the usual classroom style of learning.
 Objectives:
1. To measure how much students know about chemistry before and after
using the self-paced learning method.
2. To see if there is a difference in learning between students who used self-
paced learning and those who did not.
3. To find out how motivated students felt when learning chemistry with this
method.
4. To check if students’ motivation is connected to their performance in
chemistry.

19. Methodology:
The study used a “Quasi-Experimental Design”, which means there were two groups of students:-
One group used the self-paced learning method (experimental group).- The other group learned in the
traditional classroom way (control group).Both groups took a pre-test to measure their chemistry knowledge
before the study began. Then, the experimental group was given special learning modules that they could go
through at their own speed. The control group learned through regular classroom lessons. After both groups
finished their lessons, they took a post-test to see if they had improved. The results from both groups were
compared to see which method worked better.
Experimental Design:
 Participants: 64 high school students studying chemistry.
 Pre-test: All students took a test before starting the lessons to check how much they knew about
chemistry.
 -Groups: Students were divided into two groups:
1. Self-Paced Group: They received a learning module that let them study at their own speed. The
module included: Lessons,Practice tests, Guided lab experiments
2. Traditional Classroom Group: They followed regular classroom teaching methods, with the teacher
guiding them step-by-step.
3. Post-test: After finishing the lessons, all students took another test to see how much they had
improved.

20. 
Process :
1. Pre-Test: First, both groups took a pre-test to see how much chemistry
they knew before the study started.
2. Self-Paced Group: - They were given a module with lessons, tests, and
experiments they could do on their own ,They were allowed to move
through the lessons at their own pace, The teacher checked their
progress at certain points to make sure they were on track.
3. Traditional Classroom Group: They had normal classroom lessons with
the teacher explaining topics and giving assignments.
4. Post-Test: After the lessons, both groups took a post-test to measure
how much they had learned.
5. Motivation Check: Students also filled out a questionnaire to explain
how motivated they felt while learning.

21. Outcome:
 The students who learned with the self-paced method performed better in
the post-test compared to the students who followed the traditional
classroom method.
 The self-paced method especially helped students with higher abilities,
but it didn’t make as much of a difference for students with lower abilities.
 The students using the self-paced learning method felt more motivated to
learn chemistry and believed they had better control over their learning.
 There was a strong connection between students’ motivation and how well
they performed in their tests.
 In short, the study showed that self-paced learning can be a very effective
way to help students learn, especially for those who are already
good at a subject.

22. 5. CONCEPT MAPPING AS A TOOL FOR ENHANCING
SELFPACED LEARNING IN A DISTANCE SCEN,
JOHN ALLEN RICHBOURG WALDEN UNIVERSITY ,
2015
Intent:
 The goal of this study is to explore how concept mapping can help improve
selfpaced learning, especially in distance learning situations. The researcher
wants to see if using concept maps helps students understand and remember
information better.
Objectives:
 1. To find out if concept mapping helps students learn faster and better.
 2. To see if students who use concept maps remember the information longer.
 3. To check if there’s a connection between the quality of the concept maps
students make and how much they learn.
Methodology:
 The study used an experimental design where two groups of students were
compared:
 One group used concept maps while studying.
 The other group did not use concept maps.
 Both groups took a pretest before studying to see how much they knew. After
studying with or without concept maps, they took a posttest to see how much
they learned.

23. Experimental Design:
 Participants: 36 students in the 10th grade at an innercity school.
 PreTest: Both groups of students took a test to measure their understanding of the
science subject before the study.
 Control Group: This group learned without using concept maps.
 Treatment Group: This group used concept maps to help them study.
 PostTest: After studying, both groups took another test to measure how much they
learned.
 Quality of Concept Maps: The concept maps made by the treatment group were scored to
see if better quality maps led to better learning.
Process:
 1. PreTest: Students from both groups took a test before they started their lessons. This
test helped understand their initial knowledge of the science subject.
 2. Learning Phase:
 The treatment group was taught how to use concept maps to organize their learning.
They spent time creating maps to understand and connect key ideas from their science
lessons.
 The control group learned through regular lessons without using concept maps.
 3. PostTest: Both groups took another test after completing the lessons. The results were
compared to see if the group using concept maps learned better.
 4. Analysis: The researcher compared the pretest and posttest results of both groups to
see if concept mapping helped improve learning.

24. Final Outcome:
 The study found no significant improvement in learning between the group that
used concept maps and the one that did not.
 There was also no clear link between the quality of the concept maps and the
amount of learning.
 The researcher suggested trying concept mapping with different student groups or
in different subjects to see if it works better in other situations.
 This study shows that while concept maps may help organize information, more
research is needed to see how effective they are for learning in
different environments.

25. 6. THE ART OF SELF-REGULATED LEARNING:
TEACHING THE VISUAL ARTS
MARIA K. DIBENEDETTO AND MARTHA A. GARRETT
Intent:
 The main goal of this study is to show how students can learn to control their own
learning, become more creative, and improve their art skills. It focuses on helping
students think for themselves and learn to manage their art projects from start to finish.
Objectives:
 1. To teach students how to control their own learning while working on art projects.
 2. To help students think creatively and solve problems on their own.
 3. To show how selfregulation helps students understand and improve their art.
 4. To teach students how to look back at their own work and make changes.
Methodology:
 The study shows two different art lessons that help students learn to manage their own
learning.
 The students work on a photography project and a drawing project. During these projects,
the students are taught how to plan their work, do it, and then look back to see how they
can improve.
 The students are also given feedback from their classmates and teacher to help them
make their work better.

26. Experimental Design:
 Participants: High school students (Grade 11–12) in art class.
 Lesson 1 (Photography): Students take creative photos of themselves. They are taught how
to use lighting, setting, and other techniques to show their personality in their photos.
 Lesson 2 (Collaborative Drawing): Students write about their thoughts, then work with
others to make drawings based on what they wrote. This helps them express their personal
ideas through art.
 The study focuses on helping students plan their work, set goals, and look at their progress
throughout the project.
Process:
1. Introduction:
 In the photography lesson, students start by comparing regular selfies to more thoughtful
self-portraits.
 In the drawing lesson, students first write down their thoughts, then use those ideas to
create drawings.
2. Guided Practice:
 The teacher shows examples of creative work and helps the students plan their projects.
 The students decide how they will approach their work, whether by setting up a photo or
drawing based on their writing.

27. 3. Independent Work:
 The students work on their projects by themselves. The teacher helps them only if
needed, but students control most of the process.
 They apply the skills they learned from the teacher and manage their time and
progress.
4. Evaluation:
 Students get feedback from both the teacher and their classmates.
 They also look at their own work and think about how to improve it.
 The final artwork is judged based on how well they followed the process and the quality
of their finished product.
Final Outcome:
 Students became more creative and independent in their projects by controlling their
own learning.
 Students who looked at their work and got feedback were able to make better
improvements.
 The students learned how to plan, do, and review their art projects on their own,
helping them in future projects.
 This study shows that learning how to manage your own work can help students
become more creative and better at handling their art projects.

28. 7. INVESTIGATING POSSIBILITIES OF DEVELOPING
SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING IN ARCHITECTURE
STUDENTS USING DESIGN THINKING
STANISLAV AVSEC 1, AND MAGDALENA JAGIEŁŁO-
KOWALCZYK 2
Intent:
 The study aimed to explore how selfdirected learning (SDL) and design thinking can help
architecture students become more independent learners and improve their design skills.
The researchers wanted to find out if design thinking methods could help students
control their own learning and make better design decisions, especially for
sustainable architecture.
Objectives:
 1. To understand how well architecture students use design thinking.
 2. To measure students' ability for selfdirected learning.
 3. To explore the relationship between students’ design thinking skills and their selfdirected
learning abilities.
 4. To find out if design thinking can help students become better at learning on their own.
Methodology:
 The study used a quantitative approach. A survey was given to 117 architecture students to
measure their abilities in design thinking and self-directed learning. The students answered
questions about their design skills, how they approach learning, and how they manage their
learning process.
 The data was analyzed using a statistical method called Structural Equation Modelling
(SEM) to find relationships between students’ design thinking skills and their selfdirected
learning.

29. Experimental Design:
Participants: 1
Instruments: 17 undergraduate architecture students from the Cracow University of
Technology.
 A Design Thinking Questionnaire to measure students' skills in creative thinking,
problemsolving, and collaboration.
 A SelfDirected Learning Questionnaire to assess how well students control their
own learning, make decisions, and evaluate their progress.
Process:
 Students completed both surveys online.
 The responses were analyzed to see how students' abilities in design thinking
affected their selfdirected learning.
Process:
1. Survey Administration:
 Students were asked to fill out a survey on their design thinking abilities and how
they manage their own learning.
 The design thinking survey had questions about creativity, problemsolving,
teamwork, and how students approach learning tasks.
 The selfdirected learning survey asked about how students plan, monitor, and
evaluate their learning.

30. 2. Data Collection:
 All answers were collected and analyzed using special software that helped find
relationships between design thinking and selfdirected learning.
 The researchers used statistical models to see if students who are better at design
thinking are also better at managing their learning.
3. Evaluation:
 The analysis showed how different design thinking skills, like teamwork and
creative confidence, affect selfdirected learning skills like planning and
problemsolving.
Final Outcome:
 The study found that students who were good at design thinking, especially
teamwork and problem reframing, were also good at selfdirected learning.
 Teamwork was the strongest predictor of better learning, showing that students who
work well with others also tend to manage their learning better.
 On the other hand, creative confidence sometimes negatively affected students’
ability to evaluate their work, meaning that being very confident in their creativity
sometimes made it harder for them to judge their progress accurately.
 This study helps educators understand that by teaching design thinking, they can
also help students become better at managing their own learning, which is
important for future architects.

31. 8. SPLICE: SELF-PACED LEARNING IN AN
INVERTED CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT MATT
BOUTELL AND CURT CLIFTON
Intent:
The goal of this study was to help students learn programming more easily by using selfpaced
learning and video tutorials in an inverted classroom. The researchers wanted to give
students more time to practice coding with help from teachers during class instead of
spending class time on lectures.
Objectives:
 1. To replace traditional lectures with video lessons, so students can learn programming
concepts at their own speed.
 2. To increase the amount of time students spend practicing coding in class with teacher
support.
 3. To find out if students learn programming better with this selfpaced method compared
to regular classroom teaching.
Methodology:
 The study used an inverted classroom approach. Instead of teaching programming
concepts during class, students watched videos at home that explained key topics like
programming syntax and problemsolving. In class, they practiced writing code, and the
teacher was there to help them if they needed guidance. This way, students spent more
time actively learning rather than passively listening to lectures.

32. Experimental Design:
 Participants: Introductory computer science students (CS1).
 Pre-test: Students did not have a specific pretest mentioned, but their understanding of
programming was evaluated during class through active practice and quizzes.
 Video Lessons: Students watched two types of videos:
1. 1. Concept Videos: Short videos that taught new programming concepts.
2. 2. Live Coding Videos: Videos where an expert solved a programming problem while
explaining their thought process.
 InClass Practice: During class, students worked on programming problems while the
teacher walked around and gave help when needed.
Process:
1. Watching Videos at Home:
 Before class, students watched videos that explained programming concepts and showed
examples of how to solve coding problems.
 The videos included questions and small coding exercises to help students check if they
understood the material.
2. InClass Coding Practice:
 In class, students were given programming tasks based on what they learned in the videos.
 The teacher spent class time helping students solve these problems and answering their
questions, rather than giving lectures.

33. 3. Active Learning:
 The main focus in class was to get students actively involved in coding.
 Students who needed extra help could ask for it, while students who learned quickly
could move on to more challenging problems.
Final Outcome:
 More Practice, Better Learning: The selfpaced video lessons gave students more
time to practice coding during class, which improved their understanding of
programming.
 Flexible Learning: Students who found the material difficult could rewatch the
videos at their own pace, while those who learned quickly could move ahead faster.
 Teacher Support: Since students did most of the learning before class, the teacher
had more time to help each student individually during class.

 This study showed that replacing lectures with selfpaced videos in an inverted
classroom helps students get more handson coding experience and better support
from their teacher.

34. 9. INTERACTIVE VIDEO, TABLETS AND SELF-
PACED LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM:
PRESERVICE TEACHERS PERCEPTIONS
ANTHIA PAPADOPOULOU AND GEORGE
PALAIGEORGIOU
Intent:
 The purpose of this study is to see how interactive video and tablets can help students
learn at their own speed in the classroom. The researchers wanted to understand how
these tools could help students become more independent learners and work better in
teams.
Objectives:
 1. To understand how using interactive video and tablets helps students learn.
 2. To see if students can work at their own pace without direct help from the teacher.
 3. To find out if students enjoy this new way of learning and if they believe it improves
their learning.
Methodology:
 This study involved 48 undergraduate students who were studying to become teachers.
The students were divided into pairs and were given tablets. They used an online learning
environment to study thermal heat transfer through interactive videos. The students were
not given any instructions; they had to follow the videos and activities on their own for 45
minutes.
 Data was collected through questionnaires, focus groups, and observations to understand
how students felt about the experience and how they learned.

35. Experimental Design:
 Participants: 48 undergraduate students training to become teachers.
 Learning Tool: Students used tablets to access an online learning environment that
featured interactive videos. These videos included activities such as answering
questions and clicking on links to explore further content.
 Activity: The students worked in pairs and followed a learning path about thermal
heat transfer. They had to answer questions, work together, and follow the videos
without the teacher’s direct help.
 Data Collection: After the session, students filled out a questionnaire about how
they felt about the learning environment. The researchers also observed the
students and held focus group discussions to get more feedback.
Process in Detail:
1. Watching Interactive Videos:
 The students watched videos on the tablets that explained thermal heat transfer.
 The videos included questions and activities to keep the students engaged.
 Students could pause, rewind, or skip parts of the video, allowing them to learn at
their own speed.
2. Collaborating in Pairs:
 Students worked in pairs and discussed the video content and questions with each
other.
 They completed worksheets based on what they learned from the videos.

36. 3. Feedback and Reflection:
 After the session, the students filled out a questionnaire about how they felt about
the learning environment.
 Focus group discussions were held where students shared their thoughts on the use
of interactive video and tablets for learning.
Final Outcome:
 Positive Experience: Most students felt that using tablets and interactive videos was
fun, interesting, and helpful for learning.
 Better Understanding: Many students said that the videos helped them better
understand thermal heat transfer, and they liked that they could work at their own
speed.
 Teamwork: Students enjoyed working in pairs, discussing ideas, and solving
problems together.
 Challenges: Some students were unsure if this method would work well with
younger children in a classroom setting. They thought managing a classroom full of
students using tablets could be difficult.
 Overall, the study found that using interactive videos and tablets in the classroom
helped students learn independently and made the learning process more enjoyable.
However, more research is needed to see if this approach would work in different
subjects and with younger students.

37. 10. THE EFFECTS OF A SELF-REFLECTIVE LEARNING
PROCESS ON STUDENT ART PERFORMANCE
LISA SHAWN BLAND,2005
Intent:
 The purpose of this study is to see how a selfreflective learning process affects
students' performance in art. The researcher wanted to find out if teaching students
to think about and reflect on their own artwork could improve their art skills.
Objectives:
 1. To check if selfreflection helps students improve their art performance.
 2. To measure whether students who reflect on their work do better than those who
don’t.
 3. To see if there is a connection between students’ ability to selfreflect and their
improvement in art.
Methodology:
 This study used a quasiexperimental design. There were two groups:
 Experimental Group: These students were taught how to reflect on their artwork.
They practiced planning, monitoring, and evaluating their work through writing.
 Control Group: These students received regular art instruction without any specific
focus on selfreflection.
 Both groups completed pretests and posttests by creating portfolios of artwork. The
experimental group also completed written reflections before and after the study.

38. Experimental Design:
 Participants: 50 eighthgrade students from two different art classes in a public school in
Georgia.
 PreTest: Both groups created a portfolio of artwork before the experiment began to measure
their initial performance.
 SelfReflective Learning: The experimental group was taught how to reflect on their artwork.
They learned how to plan their projects, monitor their progress, and evaluate their final
work through written reflections.
 PostTest: Both groups created another portfolio of artwork after the experiment, and the
results were compared.
 Written Reflections: The experimental group also wrote reflections before and after their
artwork to measure how well they applied the selfreflection process.
Process in Detail:
1. PreTest Portfolio: Both groups created artwork to assess their current skills before the study.
2. Instruction for Experimental Group:
• The experimental group was taught selfreflection strategies. They learned how to plan
their artwork, evaluate their progress, and reflect on their strengths and weaknesses.
• The control group continued with their usual art lessons.
3. PostTest Portfolio: After the lessons, both groups created a second portfolio of artwork. The
quality of the work from both groups was compared.
4. Written Reflections: The experimental group also wrote about their learning process,
describing how they felt about their progress and what they could improve.

39. Final Outcome:
 Improvement in SelfReflection: The experimental group showed better scores in
their written reflections, meaning they improved in thinking about their learning
process.
 Art Performance: However, the art performance scores of both the experimental and
control groups were similar, showing no significant difference in the final artwork
itself.
 Conclusion: While selfreflection helped students think more deeply about their
learning, it did not lead to a big improvement in their art performance within the
short time frame of this study.
 This study shows that selfreflection can help students become better at thinking
about their learning process, but more time may be needed to see a big improvement
in their actual art skills.

40. 11. HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK TO HELP STUDENTS
LEARN EFFECTIVELY FROM RESEARCH-
VALIDATED SELF-PACED LEARNING TOOLS
EMILY MARSHMAN,1 SETH DEVORE,2 AND
CHANDRALEKHA SINGH 2
Intent:
 The main goal of this study is to find out how students learn when using selfpaced
learning tools. The researchers wanted to understand why some students struggle with
these tools and how to help them learn better.
Objectives:
1. To see if students engage effectively with selfpaced learning tools.
2. To understand how these tools can help students learn physics.
3. To find out if students can transfer what they learn from tutorials to different problems.
4. To create a framework that helps students use selfpaced tools more effectively.
Methodology:
 The study was conducted in a large algebrabased introductory physics class. Students
were given the option to use selfpaced interactive tutorials after regular classroom
lessons. The tutorials covered physics concepts like Newton's Second Law and
conservation of energy. Students were tested on similar problems after using these
tutorials to see how much they learned. Some students worked on the tutorials by
themselves, while others were guided through the same tutorials in oneonone interviews.

41. Experimental Design:
 Participants: Students in a large physics class.
 Tutorials: Interactive learning modules that focused on key physics topics.
 PreQuiz: Students took a quiz before the tutorial to check their understanding.
 PostQuiz: After using the tutorials, students took a similar quiz to measure how much
they learned.
 OneonOne Interviews: Some students were guided through the tutorials in interviews,
while others used the tutorials independently.
Process:
1. Tutorials as Learning Tools:
 Students were given tutorials that included multiple-choice questions and feedback to
help them understand the material.
 The tutorials guided students step by step through physics problems, offering help when
needed.
 Some students used these tutorials as self-study tools, while others received help in one-
on-one sessions.
2. Testing Knowledge:
 After using the tutorials, students were tested on similar problems to see if they could
apply what they learned.

42.  The researchers compared the results of students who worked through the tutorials
with those who did not.
3. Analyzing Results:
 The researchers looked at how well students performed in quizzes and compared
students who used the tutorials with those who didn’t.
 They also compared how students performed in oneonone interview settings versus
selfstudy.
Final Outcome:
 Better Results in One-on-one Sessions: Students who worked through the tutorials
in oneonone settings performed better on quizzes than those who used the tutorials
as selfstudy tools.
 Struggles in SelfStudy: Many students struggled to transfer what they learned from
the tutorials to new problems, especially when using the tools by themselves.
 Need for Support: The study suggests that students need more guidance and support
when using selfpaced learning tools to make the most of them.
 The researchers developed a holistic framework to help students engage better with
selfpaced learning tools, showing that more support and motivation can improve
how students use these resources.

43. 12. INTEGRATING SELF-PACED E-LEARNING WITH
CONVENTIONAL CLASSROOM LEARNING IN
NIGERIA EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
Intent:
 The purpose of this study is to explore how selfpaced elearning can be integrated with
traditional classroom learning to improve student performance in Nigeria. The
researchers wanted to find out if combining both methods would help students learn
better compared to using only traditional classroom teaching.
Objectives:
 To understand the benefits of using selfpaced elearning alongside regular classroom
learning.
 To determine if combining these two methods improves students' academic performance.
 To explore how Information and Communication Technology (ICT) can enhance the
learning experience in Nigerian schools.
Methodology:
 The study looks at how selfpaced elearning can be combined with traditional classroom
teaching. The researchers reviewed existing studies and experiences in education to
explain the benefits of this combination. They focused on using ICT tools (like computers
and the internet) to allow students to learn at their own pace outside of the classroom,
while still attending regular classes.
 The study did not involve a direct experiment but instead provided a theoretical review
based on other research and examples from schools using both methods.

44. Experimental Design:
 There is no specific experimental design in this paper, as it focuses on theoretical
ideas and previous research. The authors discussed:
 How selfpaced learning works: Students control the speed at which they learn, often
using online courses or interactive modules.
 How traditional classroom learning works: Teachers lead lessons, and students
follow a set schedule with direct instruction.
 The integration of these two methods: Students can study at their own pace through
elearning outside the classroom and attend regular classroom sessions for additional
support and instruction.
Process in Detail:
1. SelfPaced eLearning:
 Students use computers or other digital tools to learn topics at their own speed.
They can repeat lessons if needed or move faster if they understand the material
well.
 Learning happens through online courses, interactive quizzes, and digital learning
resources.
2. Classroom Learning:
 In regular classes, teachers provide lessons, explain difficult topics, and answer
questions. The teacher guides students through the material in a structured way.
 Classroom sessions offer a more social learning experience where students can
interact with peers and the teacher.

45. 3. Combining Both Methods:
 Students use selfpaced elearning to prepare for classroom lessons, study for exams,
or review material.
 In class, teachers provide deeper explanations or help students with any challenges
they faced during their selfpaced learning.
Final Outcome:
 Improved Learning: The study suggests that combining selfpaced elearning with
traditional classroom teaching can improve students' academic performance. By
learning at their own pace, students can better understand difficult topics before
class, allowing them to make the most of inclass time with the teacher.
 Increased Flexibility: Students gain more control over their learning, as they can
spend more time on challenging topics and move quickly through material they
already understand.
 Supportive Classroom Environment: Regular classroom sessions provide
opportunities for students to ask questions and get support, which enhances their
selfpaced learning experience.
 The study concludes that using selfpaced elearning alongside traditional classroom
teaching would be a great way to improve education in Nigeria, especially with the
help of ICT tools.

46. 13. SPLICE: SELF-PACED LEARNING IN AN INVERTED
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
TERRE HAUTE
Intent:
The goal of this study is to create a better way for students to learn programming using
selfpaced videos in an inverted classroom. The researchers wanted to help students
learn at their own speed, allowing more class time for practice with a teacher’s help,
instead of spending class time on lectures.
Objectives:
 To solve the problem of students struggling with the pace of programming classes.
 To give students more time for handson coding practice in class.
 To provide videos that allow students to learn programming concepts before coming
to class.
 To see if this selfpaced learning method improves student performance and
confidence in programming.
 Methodology:
 The researchers used selfpaced learning videos to replace traditional lectures in a
programming course. Students watched the videos at home and then came to class
ready to work on coding problems. The teacher spent class time walking around,
helping students, and giving feedback instead of teaching through lectures. The
videos covered programming concepts, showed examples, and guided students
through solving problems stepbystep.

47. Experimental Design:
 Participants: Students in an introductory programming course.
 Learning Materials: Videos were created to teach programming concepts, give examples,
and demonstrate problemsolving.
 PreClass Learning: Students watched these videos at their own speed before attending
class.
 InClass Practice: During class, students worked on coding problems, and the teacher
provided help as needed.
 Feedback and Mentorship: Faster students could act as peer mentors, helping other
students in class.
Process :
1. SelfPaced Video Lessons:
 Students watched videos at home. These videos explained programming concepts like
syntax and logic and showed examples of solving real coding problems.
 The videos included questions and exercises that students completed while watching to
help them understand the material.
2. InClass Practice:
 When students came to class, they worked on programming tasks right away.
 The teacher spent class time walking around, offering help and feedback to individual
students as they worked through coding problems.
 3. Peer Mentorship:
 Faster students who finished early could help others by acting as peer mentors, giving
them more learning opportunities.

48. Final Outcome:
 More HandsOn Practice: Students spent more class time practicing coding, which
helped them become more comfortable with programming.
 Flexible Learning Pace: The videos allowed students to learn at their own speed.
Slower students could rewatch parts they didn’t understand, while faster students
could move ahead.
 Improved Learning: The selfpaced videos, combined with inclass practice, allowed
students to focus more on solving real problems with expert help.
 Peer Mentorship: Having faster students help others improved the learning
environment and helped both the slower and faster learners.
 This approach to learning gave students the flexibility to control their own learning
while still getting the help they needed from teachers in class, improving both their
confidence and programming skills.

49. THANK YOU