An exploration of issues relating to the implementation of Active Learning in Saudi Arabian Universities
Abstract
Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 embraces ambitious proposals for educational reform. It includes the preparation of a modern curriculum focused on rigorous standards which will be aligned with a range of educational outcomes. Saudi higher education has laid the groundwork for developing and improving educational aspects in relation to students and lecturers and has adopted all-new approaches to education. Accordingly, this study aims to explore the perceptions of Saudi lecturers towards learning approach.
The objective of this paper is to classify Saudi lecturers’ perceptions of the advantages, challenges and future of AL. Therefore, the vital factors that affect the lecturers’ views are discussed. Qualitative methods were used to gain rich descriptive data to facilitate the exploration of the phenomena. Three universities have been selected to be investigated in this study, namely: Umm Al-Qura University, Kind Saud University and Princess Nora bint Abdulrahman University.
The results of this paper revealed a distinct pattern in the adoption and use of AL in the participating universities, although the processes of implementation varied from one university to the next. A particular emphasis of this project was that AL offered heightened learning experiences and improved students’ understanding of their courses.
References
1. Abdel, W., Kadhim, H. & Hammad, A.D.M., (2013). “Teaching Mathematics According to Active Education Method & Its Effect on the Studying of the Vocational Class Student & Developing Their Inferential Thinking in Diyala Governorate Iraq”. Thesis put forward by Supervision. University of St Clements Department of Mathematics.
2. Abdulwahed Ahmed Ismail, S., (2011). “ Exploring Students’ Perceptions of ESL Writing”. English Language Teaching, 4(2), p.73. Available at:
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/10770.
3. Abouammoh (Eds.), “Higher education in Saudi Arabia: Achievements, challenges”
4. Abu Zina, F. (2003) . “Curriculum and Teaching Mathematics”, 2nd ed., Amman: Al Falah Library.
5. Afshari, M. et al., (2013). “ Factors affecting the effective implementation of e-learning in educational institutions”. Turkish Online Journal of Science & Technology, 3(2003), pp.1–11.
6. Aguirre, D., von Post, R, & Alpern, M. (2013). “Culture’s role in enabling organizational change”. Booz & Company.
7. Ahmad, A (2013) “The strategy of cooperative learning in the development of critical thinking skills among students in the tenth grade in geography in northern Gaza governorates”, Gaza:
8. Aksit, F., H. Niemi, and A. Nevgi. (2016). “Why is Active Learning so difficult to implement”: the Turkish case. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 41:94–109.
9. Al Alhareth, Y., Al Dighrir, I. & Al Alhareth, Y., (2015). “Review of Women’s Higher Education in Saudi Arabia”. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), pp.10–15. Available at: http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/3/1/3/index.html.
10. Al Atef, N., (2013). “The Effectiveness of Teaching Home Economics Using a Proposed Program Based on the Active Learning in Developing Habits of Mind of the Second Grade Secondary Female Students”. General Curriculum and Instruction Research.
11. Al-Dakheel, M. (2008). “ A study of the College of Education at KSU, Faculty‘s”
12. Alebaikan, R. a, (2010). “ Perceptions of Blended Learning in Saudi Universities” Submitted by to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Signature: University of Exeter, (September).
13. Al-Fahad, F. N. (2009). “Students' Attitudes and Perceptions towards the Effectiveness of Mobile Learning in King Saud University, Saudi Arabia”. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 111-119.
14. Algarfi, A. (2010). “Teachers and pupils’ perceptions of and responses to cooperative learning methods within the Islamic culture courses in one secondary school in Saudi Arabia”. PhD thesis, University of Southampton, Faculty of Law, Arts & Social Science School of Education, Southampton.
15. Al-Ghamdi S., Al-Gaied, A., Abu-Rasain, M. (2012). “Faculty Evaluation in Saudi Universities”: A Suggested Model. The Saudi Journal of Higher education, 7(7):85.
16. Al-Ghamdi, G., (2011). “The Practice of Public Schools’ Principals of Transformational Leadership in Al-Mokhwa Governorate”.
17. Al-Rashidi (2015) . “Evaluation of the performance of the teacher of Islamic education in the light of teaching skills and building a model for its development in the State of Kuwait”, Amman Arab University: Unpublished Master Thesis.
18. Alromi, Naif.(2000) “Vocational Education in Saudi Arabia”. State College, PA: Penn State University.
19. Al-Sharif, S. (2000) “The effectiveness of cooperative learning strategies in the treatment of difficulties in learning mathematics and self-esteem”, 1st., Assiut University: Journal of Faculty of Education, Assiut.
20. AL-Shehry, AM (2008), “Transformation towards E-Government in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Technological and Organisational Perspectives”, Doctoral thesis, De Montfort University.
21. Al-Sulami, M, (2008). “Reform in Saudi Arabia: The Case of Municipal Elections”. JKAU: Arts & Humanities, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp: 113-135.
22. Al-Swailem, O., & Elliott, G. (2013). “The learning experiences of Saudi Arabian higher”.
23. Arab News (2018). “First Saudi woman appointed as deputy minister of labour and social development”. [online] Available at: http://www.arabnews.com/node/1255331/saudi-arabia [Accessed 29 Sep. 2018].
24. Baldwin, L.P., (2013). “Active Learning in Higher Education. Active Learning in Higher Education”, 14(3), pp.165–173.
25. Barry, C. A. (1998). “Choosing Qualitative Data Analysis Software”: Atlas/ti and Nudist Compared. Sociological Research Online, 3(3). Retrieved from
26. Basham, L (1994): “Active Learning and the at-Risk Students: Cultivating Attitude towards science and Learning”, ED474-88.
27. Baume, D., (2004). “Managing Classroom Difficulties”. Higher Education Academy, (c). Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/resources/database/id472_managing_classroom_difficulties.pdf.
28. Bonwell, C. C., & Sutherland, T. E. (1996). “The Active Learning continuum: Choosing activities to engage students in the classroom”. New Directions for Teaching & Learning (67), 3.
29. Bonwell, C. C., and Eison, J.A. (1991). “Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom”. Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
30. Brame, C.J., (2016). “Active Learning. Vanderbilt University Centre for Teaching”. Available at: https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/Active-Learning.pdf.
31. Burt, J., (2004). “Impact of Active Learning on Performance and Motivation in Female Emirati Students”. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 1, pp.1–15.
32. Cachia, R. et al., (2010). “Creative Learning and Innovative teaching”, Available at:http://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1300702480_jrc62370_learning_teaching_2010.pdf.
33. Cherney, I. (2008). “The effects of Active Learning on students’ memories for course content”. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 152-171.
34. Cheung, A., & Wong, P. M. (2011). “Factors affecting the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong”: Key findings from a large-scale survey study. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 3-3.
35. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education”. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3‐7.
36. Chikwa, G., (2012). “An investigation into the introduction and use of new technologies in secondary science teaching”. (August). Available at: http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2740/.
37. Clark, J. (2009) "A vicious circle" RISK 22(4): 23-25.
38. Clarke, L., (2013). “The Impact of Literature Circles on Student Engagement in Middle Years English”.
39. Coffman, D. D. (2009). “Learning from our elders: Survey of New Horizons International Music Association band and orchestra directors”. International Journal of Community Music, 2, 227-240.
40. Conference on Higher Education: Higher Education in the Twenty-first Century, Vision and Action. UNESCO, Paris, 5 – 9 October 1998.
41. D.A. Kolb (1984). “Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development”. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
42. Dahlan, A. & Klieb, L., (2011). “Family Businesses and Succession in Saudi Arabian Culture and Traditions”., (September), pp.1–14.
43. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000), “Futures of teaching in American Education”, Journal of Educational Change, Vol.1, No.4, pp.353- 373
44. Darwish, A. & Lakhtaria, K.I., (2011). “The Impact of the New Web 2.0 Technologies in Communication, Development, and Revolutions of Societies”. Journal of Advances in Information Technology, 2(4), pp.204–216. Available at: http://www.jait.us/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=152&id=804.
45. Donohue, S.K. & Richards, L.G., (2009). “Factors affecting student attitudes toward Active Learning activities in a graduate engineering statistics course”. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, pp.1–6.
46. Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). “How does technology-enabled Active Learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts”. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 243–279.
47. Dunlosky, J. et al., (2013). “Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology” . Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 14(1), pp.4–58.
48. Eady, M.J. & Lockyer, L., (2013). “Tools for learning: technology and teaching strategies”. Learning to Teach in the Primary School, p.71.
49. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). “Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief”, 2(4), 1–5. Retrieved 12 J. M. LA LOPA ET AL. from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/ public/Papers.pdf
50. Fernando, S. (2007). Teachers‟ Creativity and Effectiveness in Higher Education: Perceptions of Students and Faculty”. The Quality in Higher Educational
51. Ferreira, M.M. & Trudel, A.R. (2012). “The impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on student attitudes toward science, problem-solving skills, and sense of community in the classroom”. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 47(1), 23-30.
52. Gao, J. & Hargis, J., (2010). “Promoting Technology-assisted Active Learning in Computer Science Education”. The Journal of Effective Teaching CN - 0000, 10(2), pp.81–93. Available at: http://uncw.edu/cte/et/articles/Vol10_2/Gao.htm%5Cnfiles/155/Jinzhu Gao and Jace Hargis - 2010 - Promoting Technology-assisted Active Learning in C.pdf.
53. Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). “Benefits and Challenges of Blended Learning Environments”. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Information Science and Technology. (pp. 253–259). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
54. Greatbatch, D. & Holland, J.,( 2016). “Teaching Quality in Higher Education: Literature Review and Qualitative Research “. Open Government Licence (OGL), (MAY), p.73. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524495/he-teaching-quality-literature-review-qualitative-research.pdf.
55. Greenbaum, T. L. (1998). “The handbook for focus group research” (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Hein, G. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. In The Museum and the Needs of People. CECA (International Committee of Museum Educators) Conference Jerusalem Israel (pp. 15–22). Jerusalem: Institute for Inquiry.
57. Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
58. Hendriks, M., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., Sleegers, P., & Steen, R. (2010) Teachers' Professional Development. Europe in international comparison. An analysis of teachers' professional development based on the OECD's Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Union.
59. Henriksen, D. & Mishra, P., (2013). Learning from Creative Teachers. Creativity Now. 70(5), p.5. Available at: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Creative-Teachers-Henriksen-Mishra2013.pdf.
60. Herrington, J. & Oliver, R., (1991). Critical Characteristics of Situated Learning: Implications for the Instructional Design of Multimedia. Learning with technology, with techno, pp.253–262. Available at:
61. http://www.konstruktivismus.uni koeln.de/didaktik/situierteslernen/herrington.pdf.
62. Hestenes, D. (2012, January 1). Cited in Hanford, E., Physicists seek to lose the lecture as a teaching tool. NPR broadcast of American Radio works. Retrieved May 27, 2012, from http://www.npr.org/2012/01/01/144550920/physicists-seek-to-lose-the-lecture-as-teaching-tool.
63. James, E. (1990). Decision processes and priorities in higher education. In S. A. Hoenack & E. L. Collins (Eds.) The economics of American universities: Management, operations, and fiscal environment (pp. 77-106). Albany: State University of New York Press.
64. Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, F. P. (1991). Joining Together: Group Therapy and Group Skills, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
65. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Constructive Controversy: The Educative Power of Intellectual Conflict. Change, 32(1), 28-37.
66. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence: Theory and research on small groups. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
67. Joseph, S. et al., (2018). Prevalence and risk factors for myopia and other refractive errors in an adult population in southern India. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 38(3), pp.346–358.
68. Joy, S., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Are there cultural differences in learning style. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 33(1), 69-85.
69. Kaleta, R., Garnham, C., & Aycock, A. (2005). Hybrid Courses: Obstacles and Solutions for Faculty and Students. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning.
70. Kanet, J. J. & Barut, M. (2003). Problem-based learning for production and operations management. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 1(1), 99-118.
71. Kaplan, B., & Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: A case study. MIS Quarterly, 12(4), 571–587. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 249133.
72. Kariman, B. (2008). Active learning, Amman: House of the march.
73. Kariman, B. (2012) .Active learning, 2nd. Amman: Dar Al Masirah for Publishing and Distribution.
74. Keller, R. T. (1992). Transformational leadership and the performance of research and development project groups. Journal of Management, 18, 489 –501.
75. Keyser, M.( 2000). Active Learning and cooperative learning: understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Research Strategies 17, no. 1: 35-44.
76. Knight, W. H., & Holen, M. C. (1985). Leadership and the perceived effectiveness of department chairpersons. Journal of Higher Education, 56(6), 677-690.
77. Knowles, E. S., & Linn, J., A. (2008) Resistance and persuasion, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers
78. Lionarakis, A. and Papademetriou, D.,( 2003). The quality of the learning experience a comparative study between open distance and conventional education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, (2), pp.1–12.
79. Little B., Locke, W., Parker J., and Richardson, J. (2007). Excellence in teaching and learning: a review of the literature for the Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/policy/litreview_excellence_in_tl_cheri_jul07.pdf. London.
80. Loh, J., (2013). Inquiry into Issues of Trustworthiness and Quality in Narrative Studies: A Perspective. Qualitative Report, 18(33), pp.1–15. Available at: http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=89867872&site=eds-live.
81. Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N (1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformation and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic review of the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385– 425.
82. Mabrouk, P. A. (2007). Introduction. In P. Mabrouk (Ed.), Active learning: Models from analytical science: ACS symposium series (pp. 2–13). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
83. Mahri, K., (2017). Innovative thinking in the light of some Active Learning strategies. pp.325–340.
84. Mari, T. & Alhaila, M. (2002) General Teaching Methods, Jordan: Dar Al-Masirah.
85. Marwah, A. (2012) The impact of employing some Active Learning strategies in teaching science on the development of life skills among fourth graders in Gaza Governorate, Al Azhar.
86. Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
87. Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
88. Mautrofi, G (2010). The effectiveness of a proposed training program based on Active Learning strategies in the development of skills - teaching students Teachers of natural sciences at Umm Al-Qura University, Egypt: Journal of Scientific Education.
89. McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J.W., (2010). Personalised and self-regulated learning in the Web2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), pp.28–43.
90. Michel, Norbert. Cater, John. Varela, Otmar (2009)” Active Versus Passive Teaching Styles: An Empirical Study of Student Learning Outcomes”. Nicholls State University, Small Business Instutite® National Proceedings Vol. 33, No. 1 Winter
91. Ministry of Education. (2017). Education and Vision 2030. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.moe.gov.sa/en/Pages/vision2030.aspx. [Accessed 4 December 2017]. Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry. 10(2) 261-280.
92. Monks, K., Conway, E. & Dhuigneain, M.N.,( 2006). Integrating personal development and career planning: The outcomes for first year undergraduate learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), pp.73–86.
93. Moore, C. & Teather, S.,( 2012). Engaging Students in Peer Review: Feedback as Learning Engaging Students in Peer Review: Feedback as Learning., 5(2), pp.196–212.
94. Nukpe, P., (2012). Motivation: theory and use in Higher Education. Investigations in university teaching and learning, 8(1985), pp.11–17.
95. Obaidat, T., Abu Samaid, S., Suhaila, A. (2007) Brain, education and thinking, Jordan: Dar El Fikr, Amman.
96. Olives, K. (2002) Teaching science to understand constructional vision, Egypt: opportunities (pp. 37-47). New York & London: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg.
97. Owston, R. D., Garrison, D. R., & Cook K. (2006). Blended Learning at Canadian Universities. In Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R., The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp. 338-350). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
98. Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Eng. Education, 93(3), 223-231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830. 2004.tb00809.
99. Pring, R. (2000). Philosophy of Educational Research. London: Continuum
100. Qadan, H., (2016). The Effect of Active Learning-Based Instructional Program on Improving Motivation and Achievement towards Science among Middle Stage Students with Learning Disabilities in Riyadh. International Research in Education, 4(2), p.63. Available at: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ire/article/view/9934.
101. Rashwan, A. Najdi, A. (2009) .The effectiveness of a proposed program based on Active Learning in the development of some life skills among students in one-semester schools. 1st ed., Egypt: Fourth Scientific Conference. Recommendation for the Development. Educational Science and Islamic Studies, 19(1), 381-440.
102. Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A. & Swartz, E. (1998). Doing research in business and management: An introduction to process and method. London: Sage.
103. Riaz, A., & Haider, M. H. (2010). Role of transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction and career satisfaction. Business and Economic Horizons. (1), 29-38.
104. Roseveare, D., Hénard, F. & Roseveare, D., (2012). Fostering Quality Teaching in Higher Education: Policies and Practices. IMHE, (September), p.54.
105. Ross, A. & Furno, C., (2011). Active Learning in the Library Instruction Environment: An Exploratory Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11(4), pp.953–970. Available at: http://muse.jhu.edu/content/crossref/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v011/11.4.ross.html.
106. Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85 - 109.
107. Saadeh, J. (2006) .Active Learning between application theory, Amman, Dar Al Shorouq:
108. Saadeh,J. Abu Ziada, Ismael Jaber, and Zamil, Majdi Ali (2003) The impact of training Palestinian female teachers on the Active Learning method in their immediate and deferred achievement in the light of a number of variables, 2nd ed., Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences:
109. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
110. Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms. London: Sage.
111. Scott, C.L., (2015). The Futures of Learning 3: what kind of pedagogies for the 21st century. Education Research and Foresight, pp.1–21.
112. Seng, T.O., (2004). Problem-Based Learning: The Future Frontiers. Problem-based Learning: The Future Frontiers, pp.17–30. Available at: http://www.tp.edu.sg/pbl._tan_oon_seng.pdf.
113. Shaheen, N (2006). Basics and Applications in Curriculum Science, Cairo:
114. Shammari, A. (2010). The application of three methods of Active Learning in the teaching of Islamic education to students in the ninth grade - the State of Kuwait and its impact on their achievement and creative thinking, Amman: Middle East University: Unpublished Master Thesis.
115. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. (2nd edition). Sage: London.
116. Simeoni, R.J., (2011). Positive Student Outcomes Achieved Within a Large Cohort Health Foundation Year Course In The Face Of a Changing and Challenging Educational Environment. Physiotherapy, 6(2), pp.249–267.
117. Simplicio, J. S. C. (2003). What is Teacher Creativity. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Education.
118. Smiley, W. & Anderson, R., (2011). Measuring Students’ Cognitive Engagement On Assessment Tests: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis Of The Short Form Of The Cognitive Engagement Scale. Research & Practice in Assessment, 6, p.12.
119. Smith, C. V. and Cardaciotto, L. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 11, No. 1,( January 2011).www.iupui.edu/~josotl, 61
120. Steiner, L. & Morberg, Å. (2006) .Instructional Strategies and Students learning outcomes. Paper presenter at vid Higher Education Close Up in Lancaster. Lancaster University, 2006-07-23 - - 26.
121. Stephen, C., Ellis, J. & Martlew, J., (2010). Taking Active Learning into the primary school: A matter of new practices. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18(4), pp.315–329.
122. Svinicki, M., & McKeachie, W. J. (2011). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers .(13th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
123. Sywelem, M., Al-Harbi, Q., Fathema, N., & Witte, J. (2012). Learning style preferences of student teachers: A cross-cultural perspective. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1, 10-24. Techniques. London: Flamer.
124. Terenzini, P.T., Cabrera, A.F., Colbeck, C.L., Bjoklund, S.A. (2001). Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: Students' reported learning gains. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 123–130. thesis. King Saud University. Riyadh, KSA.
125. Thomas, L., Jones, R. & Ottaway, J., (2015). Effective Practice in the Design of Directed Independent Learning Opportunities. Higher Education Academy.
126. Trowler, V., 2010. Student engagement literature review. Higher Education, (November), pp.1–15. Available at: http://americandemocracy.illinoisstate.edu/documents/democratic-engagement-white-paper-2_13_09.pdf.
127. Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on Blended Learning in Higher Education. International Journal on E Learning, 6(1), 81-95.
128. Verma, G. K. & Mallick, K. (1999). Research in Education: Perspectives and
129. Vernadakis, N. et al., (2012). The impact of blended and traditional instruction in students’ performance. Procedia Technology, 1, pp.439–443. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2212017312000990.
130. Weegar, M. & Pacis, D., (2012). A Comparison of Two Theories of Learning -- Behaviourism and Constructivism as applied to Face-to-Face and Online Learning. E-Leader Manila, pp.1–20.
131. Weimer, M. E. (2002). Learner-cantered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
132. Weiss, I.R., & Pasley, J.D. (2009). Mathematics and science for a change: How to design, implement, and sustain high-quality professional development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
133. Williams, K. C., & Williams, C. C. (2011). Five key ingredients for improving student motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 12(August). Retrieved from http://www.aabri.comwww.aabri.com/manuscripts/11834 pdf
134. Wilson, S.M. & Peterson, P.L., (2006). Theories of Learning and Teaching What Do They Mean for Educators. Reproduction, (July), p.23. Available at: www.nea.org/books.
135. Youssef, I., (2016).The effectiveness of the use of certain Active Learning strategies in the development of written expression skills the in Arabic language for a number of students as a sample for Grade 2 in the United Arab Emirates.
136. Zaidi, F., (2011). Active Learning has an impact on developing the innovative thinking and learning science for third-grade the students in Mecca public pre paraton Schools., 3, pp.21–24.
137. Zakaria, Z., Care, E. & Griffin, P., (2016). Scaffolding Instruction Where It Matters: Teachers’ Shift from Deficit Approach to Developmental Model of Learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(23), pp.144–152.
2. Abdulwahed Ahmed Ismail, S., (2011). “ Exploring Students’ Perceptions of ESL Writing”. English Language Teaching, 4(2), p.73. Available at:
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/10770.
3. Abouammoh (Eds.), “Higher education in Saudi Arabia: Achievements, challenges”
4. Abu Zina, F. (2003) . “Curriculum and Teaching Mathematics”, 2nd ed., Amman: Al Falah Library.
5. Afshari, M. et al., (2013). “ Factors affecting the effective implementation of e-learning in educational institutions”. Turkish Online Journal of Science & Technology, 3(2003), pp.1–11.
6. Aguirre, D., von Post, R, & Alpern, M. (2013). “Culture’s role in enabling organizational change”. Booz & Company.
7. Ahmad, A (2013) “The strategy of cooperative learning in the development of critical thinking skills among students in the tenth grade in geography in northern Gaza governorates”, Gaza:
8. Aksit, F., H. Niemi, and A. Nevgi. (2016). “Why is Active Learning so difficult to implement”: the Turkish case. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 41:94–109.
9. Al Alhareth, Y., Al Dighrir, I. & Al Alhareth, Y., (2015). “Review of Women’s Higher Education in Saudi Arabia”. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), pp.10–15. Available at: http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/3/1/3/index.html.
10. Al Atef, N., (2013). “The Effectiveness of Teaching Home Economics Using a Proposed Program Based on the Active Learning in Developing Habits of Mind of the Second Grade Secondary Female Students”. General Curriculum and Instruction Research.
11. Al-Dakheel, M. (2008). “ A study of the College of Education at KSU, Faculty‘s”
12. Alebaikan, R. a, (2010). “ Perceptions of Blended Learning in Saudi Universities” Submitted by to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Signature: University of Exeter, (September).
13. Al-Fahad, F. N. (2009). “Students' Attitudes and Perceptions towards the Effectiveness of Mobile Learning in King Saud University, Saudi Arabia”. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 111-119.
14. Algarfi, A. (2010). “Teachers and pupils’ perceptions of and responses to cooperative learning methods within the Islamic culture courses in one secondary school in Saudi Arabia”. PhD thesis, University of Southampton, Faculty of Law, Arts & Social Science School of Education, Southampton.
15. Al-Ghamdi S., Al-Gaied, A., Abu-Rasain, M. (2012). “Faculty Evaluation in Saudi Universities”: A Suggested Model. The Saudi Journal of Higher education, 7(7):85.
16. Al-Ghamdi, G., (2011). “The Practice of Public Schools’ Principals of Transformational Leadership in Al-Mokhwa Governorate”.
17. Al-Rashidi (2015) . “Evaluation of the performance of the teacher of Islamic education in the light of teaching skills and building a model for its development in the State of Kuwait”, Amman Arab University: Unpublished Master Thesis.
18. Alromi, Naif.(2000) “Vocational Education in Saudi Arabia”. State College, PA: Penn State University.
19. Al-Sharif, S. (2000) “The effectiveness of cooperative learning strategies in the treatment of difficulties in learning mathematics and self-esteem”, 1st., Assiut University: Journal of Faculty of Education, Assiut.
20. AL-Shehry, AM (2008), “Transformation towards E-Government in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Technological and Organisational Perspectives”, Doctoral thesis, De Montfort University.
21. Al-Sulami, M, (2008). “Reform in Saudi Arabia: The Case of Municipal Elections”. JKAU: Arts & Humanities, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp: 113-135.
22. Al-Swailem, O., & Elliott, G. (2013). “The learning experiences of Saudi Arabian higher”.
23. Arab News (2018). “First Saudi woman appointed as deputy minister of labour and social development”. [online] Available at: http://www.arabnews.com/node/1255331/saudi-arabia [Accessed 29 Sep. 2018].
24. Baldwin, L.P., (2013). “Active Learning in Higher Education. Active Learning in Higher Education”, 14(3), pp.165–173.
25. Barry, C. A. (1998). “Choosing Qualitative Data Analysis Software”: Atlas/ti and Nudist Compared. Sociological Research Online, 3(3). Retrieved from
26. Basham, L (1994): “Active Learning and the at-Risk Students: Cultivating Attitude towards science and Learning”, ED474-88.
27. Baume, D., (2004). “Managing Classroom Difficulties”. Higher Education Academy, (c). Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/resources/database/id472_managing_classroom_difficulties.pdf.
28. Bonwell, C. C., & Sutherland, T. E. (1996). “The Active Learning continuum: Choosing activities to engage students in the classroom”. New Directions for Teaching & Learning (67), 3.
29. Bonwell, C. C., and Eison, J.A. (1991). “Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom”. Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
30. Brame, C.J., (2016). “Active Learning. Vanderbilt University Centre for Teaching”. Available at: https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/Active-Learning.pdf.
31. Burt, J., (2004). “Impact of Active Learning on Performance and Motivation in Female Emirati Students”. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 1, pp.1–15.
32. Cachia, R. et al., (2010). “Creative Learning and Innovative teaching”, Available at:http://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1300702480_jrc62370_learning_teaching_2010.pdf.
33. Cherney, I. (2008). “The effects of Active Learning on students’ memories for course content”. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 152-171.
34. Cheung, A., & Wong, P. M. (2011). “Factors affecting the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong”: Key findings from a large-scale survey study. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 3-3.
35. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education”. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3‐7.
36. Chikwa, G., (2012). “An investigation into the introduction and use of new technologies in secondary science teaching”. (August). Available at: http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2740/.
37. Clark, J. (2009) "A vicious circle" RISK 22(4): 23-25.
38. Clarke, L., (2013). “The Impact of Literature Circles on Student Engagement in Middle Years English”.
39. Coffman, D. D. (2009). “Learning from our elders: Survey of New Horizons International Music Association band and orchestra directors”. International Journal of Community Music, 2, 227-240.
40. Conference on Higher Education: Higher Education in the Twenty-first Century, Vision and Action. UNESCO, Paris, 5 – 9 October 1998.
41. D.A. Kolb (1984). “Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development”. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
42. Dahlan, A. & Klieb, L., (2011). “Family Businesses and Succession in Saudi Arabian Culture and Traditions”., (September), pp.1–14.
43. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000), “Futures of teaching in American Education”, Journal of Educational Change, Vol.1, No.4, pp.353- 373
44. Darwish, A. & Lakhtaria, K.I., (2011). “The Impact of the New Web 2.0 Technologies in Communication, Development, and Revolutions of Societies”. Journal of Advances in Information Technology, 2(4), pp.204–216. Available at: http://www.jait.us/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=152&id=804.
45. Donohue, S.K. & Richards, L.G., (2009). “Factors affecting student attitudes toward Active Learning activities in a graduate engineering statistics course”. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, pp.1–6.
46. Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). “How does technology-enabled Active Learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts”. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 243–279.
47. Dunlosky, J. et al., (2013). “Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology” . Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 14(1), pp.4–58.
48. Eady, M.J. & Lockyer, L., (2013). “Tools for learning: technology and teaching strategies”. Learning to Teach in the Primary School, p.71.
49. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). “Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief”, 2(4), 1–5. Retrieved 12 J. M. LA LOPA ET AL. from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/ public/Papers.pdf
50. Fernando, S. (2007). Teachers‟ Creativity and Effectiveness in Higher Education: Perceptions of Students and Faculty”. The Quality in Higher Educational
51. Ferreira, M.M. & Trudel, A.R. (2012). “The impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on student attitudes toward science, problem-solving skills, and sense of community in the classroom”. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 47(1), 23-30.
52. Gao, J. & Hargis, J., (2010). “Promoting Technology-assisted Active Learning in Computer Science Education”. The Journal of Effective Teaching CN - 0000, 10(2), pp.81–93. Available at: http://uncw.edu/cte/et/articles/Vol10_2/Gao.htm%5Cnfiles/155/Jinzhu Gao and Jace Hargis - 2010 - Promoting Technology-assisted Active Learning in C.pdf.
53. Graham, C. R., Allen, S., & Ure, D. (2005). “Benefits and Challenges of Blended Learning Environments”. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Information Science and Technology. (pp. 253–259). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
54. Greatbatch, D. & Holland, J.,( 2016). “Teaching Quality in Higher Education: Literature Review and Qualitative Research “. Open Government Licence (OGL), (MAY), p.73. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524495/he-teaching-quality-literature-review-qualitative-research.pdf.
55. Greenbaum, T. L. (1998). “The handbook for focus group research” (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Hein, G. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. In The Museum and the Needs of People. CECA (International Committee of Museum Educators) Conference Jerusalem Israel (pp. 15–22). Jerusalem: Institute for Inquiry.
57. Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.
58. Hendriks, M., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., Sleegers, P., & Steen, R. (2010) Teachers' Professional Development. Europe in international comparison. An analysis of teachers' professional development based on the OECD's Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Union.
59. Henriksen, D. & Mishra, P., (2013). Learning from Creative Teachers. Creativity Now. 70(5), p.5. Available at: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Creative-Teachers-Henriksen-Mishra2013.pdf.
60. Herrington, J. & Oliver, R., (1991). Critical Characteristics of Situated Learning: Implications for the Instructional Design of Multimedia. Learning with technology, with techno, pp.253–262. Available at:
61. http://www.konstruktivismus.uni koeln.de/didaktik/situierteslernen/herrington.pdf.
62. Hestenes, D. (2012, January 1). Cited in Hanford, E., Physicists seek to lose the lecture as a teaching tool. NPR broadcast of American Radio works. Retrieved May 27, 2012, from http://www.npr.org/2012/01/01/144550920/physicists-seek-to-lose-the-lecture-as-teaching-tool.
63. James, E. (1990). Decision processes and priorities in higher education. In S. A. Hoenack & E. L. Collins (Eds.) The economics of American universities: Management, operations, and fiscal environment (pp. 77-106). Albany: State University of New York Press.
64. Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, F. P. (1991). Joining Together: Group Therapy and Group Skills, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
65. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Constructive Controversy: The Educative Power of Intellectual Conflict. Change, 32(1), 28-37.
66. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence: Theory and research on small groups. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
67. Joseph, S. et al., (2018). Prevalence and risk factors for myopia and other refractive errors in an adult population in southern India. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 38(3), pp.346–358.
68. Joy, S., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Are there cultural differences in learning style. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 33(1), 69-85.
69. Kaleta, R., Garnham, C., & Aycock, A. (2005). Hybrid Courses: Obstacles and Solutions for Faculty and Students. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning.
70. Kanet, J. J. & Barut, M. (2003). Problem-based learning for production and operations management. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 1(1), 99-118.
71. Kaplan, B., & Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: A case study. MIS Quarterly, 12(4), 571–587. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 249133.
72. Kariman, B. (2008). Active learning, Amman: House of the march.
73. Kariman, B. (2012) .Active learning, 2nd. Amman: Dar Al Masirah for Publishing and Distribution.
74. Keller, R. T. (1992). Transformational leadership and the performance of research and development project groups. Journal of Management, 18, 489 –501.
75. Keyser, M.( 2000). Active Learning and cooperative learning: understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Research Strategies 17, no. 1: 35-44.
76. Knight, W. H., & Holen, M. C. (1985). Leadership and the perceived effectiveness of department chairpersons. Journal of Higher Education, 56(6), 677-690.
77. Knowles, E. S., & Linn, J., A. (2008) Resistance and persuasion, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers
78. Lionarakis, A. and Papademetriou, D.,( 2003). The quality of the learning experience a comparative study between open distance and conventional education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, (2), pp.1–12.
79. Little B., Locke, W., Parker J., and Richardson, J. (2007). Excellence in teaching and learning: a review of the literature for the Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/policy/litreview_excellence_in_tl_cheri_jul07.pdf. London.
80. Loh, J., (2013). Inquiry into Issues of Trustworthiness and Quality in Narrative Studies: A Perspective. Qualitative Report, 18(33), pp.1–15. Available at: http://ezproxy.asburyseminary.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=89867872&site=eds-live.
81. Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N (1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformation and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic review of the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385– 425.
82. Mabrouk, P. A. (2007). Introduction. In P. Mabrouk (Ed.), Active learning: Models from analytical science: ACS symposium series (pp. 2–13). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
83. Mahri, K., (2017). Innovative thinking in the light of some Active Learning strategies. pp.325–340.
84. Mari, T. & Alhaila, M. (2002) General Teaching Methods, Jordan: Dar Al-Masirah.
85. Marwah, A. (2012) The impact of employing some Active Learning strategies in teaching science on the development of life skills among fourth graders in Gaza Governorate, Al Azhar.
86. Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
87. Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
88. Mautrofi, G (2010). The effectiveness of a proposed training program based on Active Learning strategies in the development of skills - teaching students Teachers of natural sciences at Umm Al-Qura University, Egypt: Journal of Scientific Education.
89. McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J.W., (2010). Personalised and self-regulated learning in the Web2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), pp.28–43.
90. Michel, Norbert. Cater, John. Varela, Otmar (2009)” Active Versus Passive Teaching Styles: An Empirical Study of Student Learning Outcomes”. Nicholls State University, Small Business Instutite® National Proceedings Vol. 33, No. 1 Winter
91. Ministry of Education. (2017). Education and Vision 2030. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.moe.gov.sa/en/Pages/vision2030.aspx. [Accessed 4 December 2017]. Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry. 10(2) 261-280.
92. Monks, K., Conway, E. & Dhuigneain, M.N.,( 2006). Integrating personal development and career planning: The outcomes for first year undergraduate learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), pp.73–86.
93. Moore, C. & Teather, S.,( 2012). Engaging Students in Peer Review: Feedback as Learning Engaging Students in Peer Review: Feedback as Learning., 5(2), pp.196–212.
94. Nukpe, P., (2012). Motivation: theory and use in Higher Education. Investigations in university teaching and learning, 8(1985), pp.11–17.
95. Obaidat, T., Abu Samaid, S., Suhaila, A. (2007) Brain, education and thinking, Jordan: Dar El Fikr, Amman.
96. Olives, K. (2002) Teaching science to understand constructional vision, Egypt: opportunities (pp. 37-47). New York & London: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg.
97. Owston, R. D., Garrison, D. R., & Cook K. (2006). Blended Learning at Canadian Universities. In Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R., The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs (pp. 338-350). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
98. Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Eng. Education, 93(3), 223-231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830. 2004.tb00809.
99. Pring, R. (2000). Philosophy of Educational Research. London: Continuum
100. Qadan, H., (2016). The Effect of Active Learning-Based Instructional Program on Improving Motivation and Achievement towards Science among Middle Stage Students with Learning Disabilities in Riyadh. International Research in Education, 4(2), p.63. Available at: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ire/article/view/9934.
101. Rashwan, A. Najdi, A. (2009) .The effectiveness of a proposed program based on Active Learning in the development of some life skills among students in one-semester schools. 1st ed., Egypt: Fourth Scientific Conference. Recommendation for the Development. Educational Science and Islamic Studies, 19(1), 381-440.
102. Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A. & Swartz, E. (1998). Doing research in business and management: An introduction to process and method. London: Sage.
103. Riaz, A., & Haider, M. H. (2010). Role of transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction and career satisfaction. Business and Economic Horizons. (1), 29-38.
104. Roseveare, D., Hénard, F. & Roseveare, D., (2012). Fostering Quality Teaching in Higher Education: Policies and Practices. IMHE, (September), p.54.
105. Ross, A. & Furno, C., (2011). Active Learning in the Library Instruction Environment: An Exploratory Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11(4), pp.953–970. Available at: http://muse.jhu.edu/content/crossref/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v011/11.4.ross.html.
106. Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85 - 109.
107. Saadeh, J. (2006) .Active Learning between application theory, Amman, Dar Al Shorouq:
108. Saadeh,J. Abu Ziada, Ismael Jaber, and Zamil, Majdi Ali (2003) The impact of training Palestinian female teachers on the Active Learning method in their immediate and deferred achievement in the light of a number of variables, 2nd ed., Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences:
109. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
110. Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms. London: Sage.
111. Scott, C.L., (2015). The Futures of Learning 3: what kind of pedagogies for the 21st century. Education Research and Foresight, pp.1–21.
112. Seng, T.O., (2004). Problem-Based Learning: The Future Frontiers. Problem-based Learning: The Future Frontiers, pp.17–30. Available at: http://www.tp.edu.sg/pbl._tan_oon_seng.pdf.
113. Shaheen, N (2006). Basics and Applications in Curriculum Science, Cairo:
114. Shammari, A. (2010). The application of three methods of Active Learning in the teaching of Islamic education to students in the ninth grade - the State of Kuwait and its impact on their achievement and creative thinking, Amman: Middle East University: Unpublished Master Thesis.
115. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. (2nd edition). Sage: London.
116. Simeoni, R.J., (2011). Positive Student Outcomes Achieved Within a Large Cohort Health Foundation Year Course In The Face Of a Changing and Challenging Educational Environment. Physiotherapy, 6(2), pp.249–267.
117. Simplicio, J. S. C. (2003). What is Teacher Creativity. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Education.
118. Smiley, W. & Anderson, R., (2011). Measuring Students’ Cognitive Engagement On Assessment Tests: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis Of The Short Form Of The Cognitive Engagement Scale. Research & Practice in Assessment, 6, p.12.
119. Smith, C. V. and Cardaciotto, L. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 11, No. 1,( January 2011).www.iupui.edu/~josotl, 61
120. Steiner, L. & Morberg, Å. (2006) .Instructional Strategies and Students learning outcomes. Paper presenter at vid Higher Education Close Up in Lancaster. Lancaster University, 2006-07-23 - - 26.
121. Stephen, C., Ellis, J. & Martlew, J., (2010). Taking Active Learning into the primary school: A matter of new practices. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18(4), pp.315–329.
122. Svinicki, M., & McKeachie, W. J. (2011). Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers .(13th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
123. Sywelem, M., Al-Harbi, Q., Fathema, N., & Witte, J. (2012). Learning style preferences of student teachers: A cross-cultural perspective. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1, 10-24. Techniques. London: Flamer.
124. Terenzini, P.T., Cabrera, A.F., Colbeck, C.L., Bjoklund, S.A. (2001). Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: Students' reported learning gains. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 123–130. thesis. King Saud University. Riyadh, KSA.
125. Thomas, L., Jones, R. & Ottaway, J., (2015). Effective Practice in the Design of Directed Independent Learning Opportunities. Higher Education Academy.
126. Trowler, V., 2010. Student engagement literature review. Higher Education, (November), pp.1–15. Available at: http://americandemocracy.illinoisstate.edu/documents/democratic-engagement-white-paper-2_13_09.pdf.
127. Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on Blended Learning in Higher Education. International Journal on E Learning, 6(1), 81-95.
128. Verma, G. K. & Mallick, K. (1999). Research in Education: Perspectives and
129. Vernadakis, N. et al., (2012). The impact of blended and traditional instruction in students’ performance. Procedia Technology, 1, pp.439–443. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2212017312000990.
130. Weegar, M. & Pacis, D., (2012). A Comparison of Two Theories of Learning -- Behaviourism and Constructivism as applied to Face-to-Face and Online Learning. E-Leader Manila, pp.1–20.
131. Weimer, M. E. (2002). Learner-cantered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
132. Weiss, I.R., & Pasley, J.D. (2009). Mathematics and science for a change: How to design, implement, and sustain high-quality professional development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
133. Williams, K. C., & Williams, C. C. (2011). Five key ingredients for improving student motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 12(August). Retrieved from http://www.aabri.comwww.aabri.com/manuscripts/11834 pdf
134. Wilson, S.M. & Peterson, P.L., (2006). Theories of Learning and Teaching What Do They Mean for Educators. Reproduction, (July), p.23. Available at: www.nea.org/books.
135. Youssef, I., (2016).The effectiveness of the use of certain Active Learning strategies in the development of written expression skills the in Arabic language for a number of students as a sample for Grade 2 in the United Arab Emirates.
136. Zaidi, F., (2011). Active Learning has an impact on developing the innovative thinking and learning science for third-grade the students in Mecca public pre paraton Schools., 3, pp.21–24.
137. Zakaria, Z., Care, E. & Griffin, P., (2016). Scaffolding Instruction Where It Matters: Teachers’ Shift from Deficit Approach to Developmental Model of Learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(23), pp.144–152.
Authors
[1]
“An exploration of issues relating to the implementation of Active Learning in Saudi Arabian Universities”, Soc. sci. humanities j., vol. 3, no. 05, pp. 1164–1189, May 2019, Accessed: Nov. 23, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://sshjournal.com/index.php/sshj/article/view/374
Copyright and license info is not available