This study’s urgency is determined by absence of serious researches in the usage area of «flipped» learning model (FLM) applied to engineering geometry and computer graphics (EGCG); by absence of scientifically-based, tested and implemented programs and learning materials for EGCG FLM; as well as by the need for development of new modern tools to support classroom work and forms of students’ individual work. The purpose of this study is to examine the current state of knowledge and practice of existing EGCG courses, using the FLM concept as the main pedagogical strategy. Research methods are pedagogical experiment, expert assessment, cluster analysis. Problem state: since 2012 the FLM approach has gained popularity not only in schools but also in engineering universities. FLM presents opportunities for solutions of complex pedagogic problems in engineering education, but creates some difficulties in model implementation preparing. Most of based on the FLM researches in the area of engineering education have been conducted on the basis of short-term studies, and on feedback from professors and students and their reviews. Theoretical and practical contribution of materials: this paper represents a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative researches on engineering courses using the FLM. The study has demonstrated that the issues of EGCG FLM have not been investigated in the scientific and methodological literature. Has been identified students relation to the FLM, as well as to the role of learning materials and professor’s personality in the FLM. Advantages and disadvantages of the FLM have been revealed, and recommendations on students training have been presented. Study significance: the study has proved the absence of scientifically-based, tested and implemented programs and learning materials for students learning on EGCG using FLM. To create reasonable theoretical bases for pedagogy in the area of EGCG FLM, as well as corresponding evaluation methods it is necessary to conduct further scientific researches examining various aspects related to practical implementation of long-term programs and learning materials. This paper’s materials can be useful for lecturers of technical universities.
Engineering Geometry and Computer Graphics (EGCG), Flipped (Inverted) Learning Model (FLM), cluster analysis, systematic review.
Ранее инженерное образование в основном поддерживало традиционные педагогические подходы. Однако недавние революционные достижения в области информационных технологий, широкомасштабное развитие интернет-технологий открыли совершенно новые направления исследований в области образования.
1. Belov N.V., Voronina M.V. Forsayt issledovanie strategii razvitiya kafedryi nachertatelnoy geometrii i grafiki na osnove ideologii «Industrial 4.0» [Foresight investigation of the strategy of development of department of the scientific geometry and graphics on the basis of ideology «Industrial 4.0»]. Trudy IV Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-metodicheskoy konferentsii «Sovremennyie obrazovatelnyie tehnologii v prepodavanii estestvenno-nauchnyih i gumanitarnyih distsiplin» (Sankt-Peterburg, 11-12 aprelya 2017 g.) [Proceedings of the IV International Scientific and Methodical Conference "Modern Educational Technologies in the Teaching of Natural Sciences and Humanities" (St. Petersburg, April 11–12, 2017)]. St. Petersburg, Sankt-Peterburgskiy gornyiy universitet Publ., 2017, V. 1, pp. 971–976. (in Russian).
2. Boykov A.A. Geometricheskoe modelirovanie v sisteme distantsionnogo obucheniya [Geometric modeling in the system of distance learning]. Geometriya i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2014, V. 2, I. 4, pp. 34–42. DOI: 10.12737/8295. (in Russian).
3. Bondarenko A.A., Voronina M.V. Obosnovanie neobhodimosti provedeniya Forsayt issledovaniy strategii razvitiya uchebnoy distsiplinyi «Nachertatelnaya geometriya, inzhenernaya i kompyuternaya grafika» na osnove ideologii «Industrial 4.0» [The substantiation of the need for carrying out of the foresight research of the strategy of development of the discipline "descriptive geometry, engineering and computer graphics" based on "Industrial 4.0" ideology]. Trudy IV Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-metodicheskoy konferentsii «Sovremennyie obrazovatelnyie tehnologii v prepodavanii estestvenno- nauchnyih i gumanitarnyih distsiplin» (Sankt-Peterburg, 11–12 aprelya 2017 g.) [Proceedings of the IV International Scientific and Methodical Conference "Modern Educational Technologies in the Teaching of Natural Sciences and Humanities" (St. Petersburg, April 11–12, 2017)]. St. Petersburg, Sankt-Peterburgskiy gornyiy universitet Publ., 2017, V. 1, pp. 976–981. (in Russian).
4. Vyishnepolskiy V.I. Pokazatel kachestva rabotyi prepodavatelya i kafedryi [The indicator of the quality of work of the teacher and the department]. Geometriya i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2014, V. 2, I. 4, pp. 15–21. DOI: 10.12737/8293. (in Russian).
5. Grosheva T.V., Kochurova L.V., Turitsyina I.A. K voprosu ob organizatsii samostoyatelnoy rabotyi studentov v protsesse graficheskoy podgotovki [On the organization of independent work of students in the process of graphic preparation]. Geometriya i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2014, V. 2, I. 2, pp. 43–48. DOI: 10.12737/5592. (in Russian).
6. Zhukovskiy V.E. Izuchenie setevyih tehnologiy v «perevyornutom klasse» [Study of network technologies in the "flipped class"]. Trudy IV Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-metodicheskoy konferentsii «Sovremennyie obrazovatelnyie tehnologii v prepodavanii estestvenno-nauchnyih i gumanitarnyih distsiplin» (Sankt-Peterburg, 11–12 aprelya 2017 g.) [Proceedings of the IV International Scientific and Methodological Conference "Modern Educational Technologies in the Teaching of Natural Sciences and Humanities" (St. Petersburg, April 11–12, 2017)]. St. Petersburg, Sankt-Peterburgskiy gornyiy universitet Publ., 2017, V. 1, pp. 16–24. (in Russian).
7. Ignatev S.A., Moroz O.N., Tretyakova Z.O., Folomkin A.I. Opyit razrabotki elektronnyih sredstv obucheniya dlya prepodavaniya geometro-graficheskih distsiplin [Experience in the development of electronic means of teaching for the teaching of geometric-graphic disciplines]. Geometriya i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2017, V. 5, I. 2, pp. 84–92. DOI: 10.12737/article_5953f362d92c46.58282826. (in Russian).
8. Livinova S.G. Tehnologiya «Perevernutoe obuchenie» v oblachno orientirovannoy uchebnoy srede kak komponent razvitiya mediaobrazovaniya v sredney shkole [Technology "Inverted Learning" in the cloud-oriented learning environment as a component of the development of media education in the secondary school]. Mediasfera i mediaobrazovanie: spetsifika vzaimodeystviya v sovremennom sotsiokulturnom prostranstve [Mediosphere and media education: the specificity of interaction in the modern sociocultural space]. 2015, V. 47, I. 3, pp. 49–66. (in Russian).
9. Miroshnikova N.N. «Perevernutyiy klass» — innovatsionnaya model v obuchenii inostrannyim yazyikam v vyisshey shkole ["Inverted class" — an innovative model in teaching foreign languages in higher education]. Materialyi V Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii «Innovatsionnyie tehnologii v nauke i obrazovanii» [Materials of the V International scientific and practical conference "Innovative technologies in science and education"]. Cheboksaryi, 2016, V. 1, I. 5, pp. 214–216. (in Russian).
10. Perevernutyiy klass: tehnologiya prepodavaniya XXI veka [Inverted class: the technology of teaching the XXI century]. Available at: http://www.ispring.ru/elearning-insights/ perevernutyi-klass-tekhnologiya-obucheniya-21-veka (accessed 25 July 2017).
11. Rybalko T.T. Innovatsionnaya model «Perevernutyiy klass» pri izuchenii inostrannogo yazyika v sredney shkole [Innovative model "Inverted class" in learning a foreign language in high school]. Materialy desyatoy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii «Professionalnoe lingvoobrazovanie» [Materials of the tenth international scientific and practical conference "Professional linguistic education"]. Nizhny Novgorod, 2016, pp. 278–284. (in Russian).
12. Sal'kov N.A. Geometricheskoe modelirovanie i nachertatel'naja geometrija [Geometric modeling and descriptive geometry]. Geometrija i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2016, V. 4, I. 4, pp. 31–61. DOI: 10.12737/22841. (in Russian).
13. Sal'kov N.A. Mesto nachertatelnoy geometrii v sisteme geometricheskogo obrazovaniya tehnicheskih vuzov [Place descriptive geometry in the system of geometric education of technical universities]. Geometrija i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2016, V. 4, I. 3, pp. 53–61. DOI: 10.12737/21534. (in Russian).
14. Sal'kov N.A. Nachertatel'naja geometrija — baza dlja komp'juternoj grafiki [Descriptive geometry — the basis for computer graphics]. Geometrija i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2016, V. 4, I. 2, pp. 37–47. DOI: 10.12737/19832. (in Russian).
15. Sal'kov N.A. Distantsionnoe obuchenie graficheskim distsiplinam. Testirovanie. Analiz situatsii [Distance learning graphic disciplines. Testing. Analysis of the situation]. Geometrija i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2014, V. 2, I. 4, pp. 7–14. DOI: 10.12737/8292 (in Russian).
16. Usanova E.V. Formirovanie bazovogo urovnya geometro-graficheskoy kompetentnosti v elektronnom obuchenii [Formation of a basic level of geometric-graphic competence in e-learning]. Geometriya i grafika [Geometry and graphics]. 2016, V. 4, I. 1, pp. 64–72. DOI: 10.12737/18059. (in Russian).
17. Kharitonova M.V. Kak perevernut' urok? [How to turn the lesson?]. Materialy Vserossiyskogo festivalya peredovogo pedagogicheskogo opyta «Sovremennye metody i priemy obucheniya» [Materials of the All-Russian Festival of Advanced Pedagogical Experience "Modern Methods and Methods of Learning"]. NAUKOGRAD Publ., 2014. I. 1. Available at: http://nauka-it.ru/ (accessed 25 July 2017).
18. Abeysekera L. & Dawson P. Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research // Higher Education Research and Development, 2015. No. 34(1). P. 1–14.
19. Amresh A., Carberry A.R. & Femiani J. Evaluating the effectiveness of flipped classrooms for teaching CS1 // Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE. Oklahama City, OK: IEEE Xplore Digital Library, 2013. P. 733—735.
20. Ankeny C.J. & Krause S.J. Flipped biomedical engineering classroom using pencasts and muddiest point web-enabled tools // Proceedings of 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, 2014. P. 1–17.
21. Artyukhina A.I., Velikanova O.F., Tretjak S.V., Chumakov V.I., Velikanov V.V., Ivanova N.V. Interactive teaching methods in the development of the situational readiness of a specialist // The Austrian Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2016. № 1–2. P. 48–50.
22. Baepler P., Walker J.D.& Driessen M. It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms // Computers and Education, 2014. No. 78. P. 227–236.
23. Bailey R. & Smith M.C. Implementation and Assessment of a Blended Learning Environment as an Approach to Better Engage Students in a Large Systems Design Class // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia, 2013. P. 13.
24. Bart M. Survey confirms the growth of the flipped classroom // Faculty Focus. 2013, November 20. Retrieved June 7, 2017, from https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/ blended-flipped-learning/survey-confirms-growth-of-theflipped- classroom/
25. Bergmann J. & Sams A. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day // International Society for Technology in Education, 2012. P. 112.
26. Bergmann J. & Sams A. Flipped Learning: Gateway to Student Engagement, 2014. P. 182.
27. Berrett D. How flipping the classroom can improve the traditional lecture, 2012. Retrieved June 7, 2017 from http:// ribonode.ucsc.edu/SciEd/pdfs/CHI_GuideFlippedClassroom. pdf/
28. Bishop J. & Verleger M. 1 Testing the flipped classroom with model-eliciting activities & video lectures in a mid-level undergraduate engineering course // Proceeding of Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2013.
29. Bishop J. & Verleger M. 2 The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia, 2013. P. 13.
30. Bland L. Applying flip/inverted classroom model in electrical engineering to establish life-long learning // Proceedings of ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois, 2006.
31. Bogam R.R. Effect of Flipped Classroom Model on Knowledge of Medical Students in Context of Community Medicine // International Journal of Advanced Research in Education & Technology (IJARET), 2015. No. 2. P. 111–113.
32. Borrego M., Foster M.J. & Froyd J.E. Systematic literature reviews in engineering education and other developing interdisciplinary fields // Journal of Engineering Education, 2014. No. 103(1). P. 45–76.
33. Boudet F.J. & Talón J. Use of wiki as a postgraduate education learning tool: A case study // International Journal of Engineering Education, 2012. No. 28(6). P. 1334–1340.
34. Bretzmann J. Flipping 2.0: Practical Strategies for Flipping Your Class, 2013. P. 328.
35. Campbell J. Evaluating an inverted CS1 / J. Campbell et al. // SIGCSE 2014 — Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2014.
36. Canino J.V. Comparing student performance in thermodynamics using the flipped classroom and think-pair-share pedagogies // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, WA, 2015.
37. Chao C.-Y., Chen Y.-T. & ChuangK.-Y. Exploring students learning attitude and achievement in flipped learning supported computer aided design curriculum: A study in high school engineering education // Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 2015. No. 23(4). P. 514–526.
38. Chen Y., Wang Y., Kinshuk & Chen N.S. Is FLIP enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED model instead? // Computers and Education, 2014. No. 79. P. 16–27.
39. Chetcuti S., Thomas H. & Pafford B. Flipping the engineering classroom: lessons learned in the creation, production and implementation, 2014. Retrieved June, 7, 2017 from https://www.asee.org/documents/sections/middle-atlantic/ fall-2013/7-Hans-Flipping-the-Engineering-Classroom.pdf/
40. Chiang Y. & Wang C. Effects of the in-flipped classroom on the learning environment of database engineering // International Journal of Engineering Education, 2015. No. 31(2). P. 454–460.
41. Chohan I.R. Group Dynamics in Flipped and Social Learning Situations in Higher Education, 2016. Retrieved June, 6, 2017 from http://conference.pixel-online.net/FOE/files/foe/ed0006/FP/2975-ITL1895-FP-FOE6.pdf/
42. Choi E. Applying inverted classroom to software engineering education // International Journal of E-Education, E-Business, E-Management and E-Learning, 2013. No. 3(2). P. 121–125.
43. Clemens B.M., Nivargi C., Jan A., Lu Y., Schneider E. & Manning J. Adventures with a flipped classroom and a materials science and engineering MOOC: «fools go where angels fear to tread» // Proceedings of Materials Research Society Symposium. 1583. Boston, MA, 2013.
44. Coventry University Staff Survey on Flipped Teaching Provision, 2016. Retrieved June, 6, 2017 from http:// dmll.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/flipped-phase- 1-staff-survey.pdf/
45. Davies R.S., Dean D.L. & Ball N. Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course // Educational Technology Research and Development, 2013. No. 61(4). P. 563—580.
46. Definition of Flipped Learning, 2014, March 12. Retrieved June 19, 2017 from http://fln.schoolwires.net/domain/46/
47. Drake L., Kayser M. & Jacobowitz R. The Flipped Classroom. An Approach to Teaching and Learning // A 2020 VISION for public education in Ulster County. The Benjamin Center, SUNY New Paltz Ulster County School Boards Association, State University of New York, New Paltz, NY, 2016. Retrieved June, 6, 2017 from http://www.newpaltz.edu/media/the-benjamin-center/P.Brief_2020Vision-Flipped%20classroom.pdf/
48. Estes M., Ingram R. & Liu J.C. A review of flipped classroom research, practice, and technologies // International HETL, 2014. Review, 4. Retrieved June, 7, 2017 from https://www. hetl.org/a-review-of-flipped-classroom-research-practiceand-technologies/
49. Everett J.W., Morgan J.K., Stanzione J.F. & Mallouk K.E. A hybrid flipped first-year engineering course // Proceedings of 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, 2014.
50. Flipped classroom // In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2017 (June 6). Retrieved June 19, 2017 from https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Flipped_classroom/
51. Folomkin A.I., Voronina M.V. Educational library for the automation of design calculations springs using SOLIDWORKS API // Man In India. 2017. No. 97 (3). P. 443—451.
52. Furse C.M., Ziegenfuss D. & Bamberg S. Learning to teach in the flipped classroom // IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society, AP-S International Symposium (Digest), 2014. P. 910–911.
53. Gannod G.C., Burge J.E. & Helmick M.T. Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering // Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering. Leipzig, Germany, 2008. P. 777–786.
54. Hagen E.J. & Fratta D. Hybrid learning in geological engineering: Why, how, and to what end? // Proceedings of Geo-Congress 2014 Technical Papers: Geocharacterization and modeling for sustainability, Atlanta, GA: ASCE, 2014. P. 3920–3929.
55. Hamdan N., McKnight P., McKnight K. & Arfstrom K.M. A review of flipped learning, 2013. Retrieved June 6, 2017, from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/ onedot-com/global/Files/efficacy-and-research/he/fl-1-LitReview_ 2014_FlippedLearning_vFinal_JK_WEB.pdf/
56. Herreid C.F., Schiller N.A. Case Studies and the Flipped Classroom // Journal of College Science Teaching, 2013. No. 42 (5).
57. Ingram D., Wiley B., Miller C. & Wyberg T.A. Study of the Flipped Math Classroom in the Elementary Grades // Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement, Saint Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, College of Education and Human Development, 2014.
58. Ivala E., Thiart F. & Gachago D. A lecturer’s perception of the adoption of the inverted classroom or flipped method of curriculum delivery in a hydrology course, in a resource poor university of technology // Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on E-Learning. Cape Town, South Africa: ACPI, 2013. P. 207–214.
59. Jungic V., Kaur H., Mulholland J. & Xin C. On flipping the classroom in large first year calculus courses // International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2015. No. 46. P. 1–8.
60. Kaleem F., Jacobson D.W. & Khan F. Comparison of Traditional, Flipped, and Hybrid Teaching Methods in an Electrical Engineering Circuit Analysis Course // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, 2016. P. 15.
61. Karabulut-Ilgu A., Cherrez N.J. & Jahren Ch.T. A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education // British Journal of Educational Technology. (2017, February 20). Retrieved June 16, 2017, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.12548/pdf/
62. Kay R. & Kletskin I. Evaluating the use of problem-based video podcasts to teach mathematics in higher education // Computers & Education, 2012. No. 59. P. 619–627.
63. Kerr B. The flipped classroom in engineering education: A survey of the research // Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), Florence, Italy, 2015, September 20–24. Retrieved June 19, 2017, from http://www.weef2015.eu/Proceedings_WEEF2015/proceedings/papers/Contribution1252.pdf/
64. Kim M.K., Kim S.M. , Khera O. & Getman J. The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles // Internet and Higher Education, 2014. No. 22. P. 37–50.
65. Kostka I. & Lockwood R.B. What’s on the Internet for Flipping English Language Instruction? // The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 2015, August. No. 19 (2). Retrieved June 6, 2017, from http://www.tesl-ej.org/pdf/ ej74/int.pdf/
66. Kwan Lo Ch. & Foon Hen Kh. A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: Possible solutions and recommendations for future research // Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2017. No. 12(4). P. 1–22.
67. Lee A., Zhu H. & Middleton J.A. Effectiveness of flipped classroom for mechanics of materials // ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2016.
68. Love B., Hodge A., Grandgenett N. & Swift A.W. Student learning and perceptions in a flipped linear algebra course // International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2014. No. 45. P. 317–324.
69. Mason G.S., Shuman T.R. & Cook K.E. Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course // IEEE Transactions on Education, 2013. P. 430–435.
70. Mcclelland C. J. Flipping a large-enrollment fluid mechanics course -Is it effective? / C. J. Mcclelland // ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA, 2013.
71. McGivney-Burelle J. & Primus Xue F. Flipping Calculus, 2013. No. 23(5). P. 477–486.
72. McKittrick C. & Ligon E. Flipping a Large Lecture Hall Class: Creating Scaffolded Interactive Learning Using Technology and CaseBased Group Activities in a 390-Seat Auditorium // Conference on Teaching Large Classes. The Inn at Virginia Tech and Skelton Conference Center Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, 2015. P. 17—18.
73. Mendoza Diaz N.V. The Inverted Engineering Classroom: An Analysis of the Impact in a First Year Engineering Program // Proceedings of the 7th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference, Roanoke, VA, 2015, August 3–4. P. M4C1–M4C3.
74. Mok H.N. Teaching tip: The flipped classroom // Journal of Information Systems Education, 2014. No. 25. P. 7–11.
75. Papadopoulos C. & Santiago Roman A. Implementing an inverted classroom model in engineering statics: Initial results // Proceedings of the 117th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky, 2010.
76. Puarungroj W. Inverting a Computer Programming Class with the Flipped Classroom // The Twelfth International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society, 11–12 December 2015, Thailand, 2016. P. 40.1—40.7.
77. Redekopp M.W. & Ragusa G. Evaluating flipped classroom strategies and tools for computer engineering // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA, 2013.
78. Rockland R. Learning outside the classroom — Flipping an undergraduate circuits analysis course // Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2013.
79. Rodrigues D. & Mouraz A. «Flipped classroom» as new challenge in higher education: a multi case study // Challenges in Higher Education, 2014. P. 207–220.
80. Rutherfoord R. & Rutherfoord J. Flipping the classroom — Is it for you? // Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGITE Annual Conference on Information Technology Education, 2013.
81. Sahin M. & Kurban K.H. The Flipped Approach to Higher Education: Designing Universities for Today's Knowledge Economies and Societies, 2016. P. 229. Retrieved June 6, 2017, from https://www.amazon.com/Flipped-Approach- Higher-Education-Universities/dp/1786357445/
82. Simenko E.V., Voronina M.V. Constructive Methods of Forming Surfaces // International Journal of Applied Engineering Research. 2017. No. 12 (6). P. 956—962.
83. Simpson W., Evans D., Eley R. & Stiles M. Findings from the HEI “Flip” project: Application issues // International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, 2003. No. 13(5). P. 471—482.
84. Talbert R. Inverting the Linear Algebra classroom // PRIMUS: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 2014. No. 24. P. 361–374.
85. Talbert R. & Valley G. Learning MATLAB in the inverted classroom // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, 2012.
86. Thomas J.S. & Philpot T.A. An inverted teaching model for a mechanics of materials course // ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, 2012.
87. Touchton M. Flipping the Classroom and Student Performance in Advanced Statistics: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment // Journal of Political Science Education, 2015. No. 11(1). P. 28–44.
88. Van Veen B. Flipping signal-processing instruction (SP education) // IEEE Signal Processing Journal, 2013. No. 30(6). P. 145–150.
89. Velegol S.B., Zappe S.E. & Mahoney E. The Evolution of a flipped classroom: Evidence-based recommendations // Advances in Engineering Education, 2015. No. 4(3). P. 1–37.
90. Voronina M.V., Moroz O.N. A substantiation of foresight research of development strategy of descriptive geometry, engineering geometry and computer graphics depart-ments on the basis of industrial 4.0 ideology // Man In India. 2017. No. 97(3). P. 375–389.
91. Voronina M.V., Muratbakeev Ed.Kh. History and modern interpretations of descriptive geometry in today's Russian engineering university // Man In India. 2017. No. 97. P. 1–15.
92. Voronina M.V., TretyakovaZ.O. The Experience of Teaching of Descriptive Geometry and Engineering Graphics in Russian language as a Foreign Language // International journal of environmental & science education. 2017. No. 12 (1). P. 25–34.
93. Voronina M.V., Moroz O.N., Tretyakova Z.O., Folomkin A.I. Descriptive geometry in educational process of Technical University in Russia today // International journal of environmental & science education. 2016. No. 11 (17). P. 10911–10922.
94. Voronina M.V., Moroz O.N., Sudarikov A.E., Rakhimzhanova M.B., Muratbakeev E.Kh. Systematic review and results of the experiment of a flipped learning model for the courses of descriptive geometry, engineering and com-puter graphics, computer geometry // Eurasia journal of mathematics, science and technology education. 2017. No. 13(8). P. 4831–4845.
95. Wilson S. The flipped class: A method to address the challenges of an undergraduate statistics course // Teaching of Psychology, 2013. No. 40(3). P. 193–199.
96. Yarbro J., Arfstrom K.M., McKnight K., McKnight P. Extension of a review of flipped learning, 2014, June. Retrieved June 6, 2017, from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/ one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/efficacy-and-research/ he/fl-4-613_A023_FlippedLearning_2014_JUNE_SinglePage_f.pdf/
97. Zengin I. Investigating the Use of the Khan Academy and Mathematics Software with a Flipped Classroom Approach in Mathematics Teaching // Educational Technology & Society, 2017. No. 20 (2). P. 89–100.