The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Teaching For Quality Learning At University
BIGGS, J. B., & Tang, C. S. (1999) · Cited by 7,559
Teaching for quality learning at university
Boulton‐Lewis, G. M. (2008) · Faculty of Education · Cited by 4,926
(2009) · US Department of Education · Cited by 3,654
Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118269558 · Cited by 1,609
Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013) · Cited by 1,584
Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines.
Wainwright, S. (2011) · Journal of Physical Therapy Education · doi:10.1097/00001416-201110000-00013 · Cited by 1,438
What is assessment for learning
Wiliam, D. (2011) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001 · Cited by 1,282
Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. (2004) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.192 · Cited by 1,078
Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation to outcomes
López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023 · Cited by 921
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.1100 · Cited by 920
Cited by
Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701 · Cited by 1,472
Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001 · Cited by 698
Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., López Sánchez, J. Á., & Godoy-Caballero, A. L. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103608 · Cited by 312
Harnessing AI for education 4.0: Drivers of personalized learning.
Barrera Castro, G. P., Chiappe, A., Becerra Rodriguez, D. F., & Sepulveda, F. G. (2024) · Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ejel.22.5.3467 · Cited by 132
Digital training for building resilience: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression
Ang, W. H. D., Chew, H. S. J., Dong, J., Yi, H., Mahendren, R., & Lau, Y. (2022) · Stress and Health · doi:10.1002/smi.3154 · Cited by 83
“Flexible programme schedules provide users with more control and organization of their learning, and this may then increase their interest and thus sustain them in the training programme (Li et al., 2020; Wanner & Palmer, 2015).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Wanner, T., & Palmer, E.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-10
- Volume
- 88
- Pages
- 354-369
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1120211608
- Cited by
- 468
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 125.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.008
- The paper
- Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2015). Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
