Student–Teacher Role Reversal at University Level—An Experience in Naval Engineering Education
- First stage. At the beginning of the course, the students began motivated, asked questions and did not miss many classes (90% average attendance). It should be clarified that attendance is not compulsory but gives an extra point in the final mark. Students are only attending the theoretical class and have not yet started their final Bachelor’s project or their company training. During this period, the lecturer asked students to read different news sources about the subject for the next class discussion. Between 80 and 90% of the students read the articles and participated in the class discussion.
- Second stage. After the first month out of a four-month class period, the students’ attendance decreased by approximately 10–20%. In this stage, only a few questions were asked in class and the students did not seem to be interested in the subject. Homework was only developed by 40–50% of the students. The students have started their final projects, so the pressure has increased and time for the rest of the subjects has decreased.
- Third stage. During the last part of the course, most of the students did company practices in the morning, usually from 8 a.m. until 2 p.m., and they took the university lessons from the afternoon until the evening. The students missed many classes, and their attendance was random but less than 60%. They do not seem to be focused on the class, and most of them admit that they feel tired and stressed because of the “lifestyle” of the last course. They also indicate that the classes are very late (7–9 p.m.), so they cannot focus on the lesson adequately because of the physical and mental fatigue.
- Fourth stage. Approximately two weeks before the course ended, the students were completely disconnected from the subject. The teacher asked questions about the latest class, and less than 40% knew the answer. Indeed, when a non-informed test was carried out including simple questions about previous lessons, 100% of the students failed.
2.1.1. Traditional Classes
2.1.2. Proposed Class
2.2. Methodology Description
- Group creation. This is performed in the first class of the activity. A general view of the development of the activity is also introduced. The class is divided into two groups, which halves the number of students.
- Period of preparation. One week is provided for autonomous work preparation. Students must search, classify, and study the topic. It is indicated that they can use whatever resource they might need to explain different topics and that they can use a free explanation system. Furthermore, two hours of the class are used to discuss personal doubts about the activity.
- Mixing groups. On the day of the explanation of the different topics, random groups are formed. Those new groups are made with one student from the previous groups that halve the class. Therefore, the new group is based on two students, each with a different topic.
- Teaching lesson. Both members of the group explain their lesson. They are given 30 min for the explanation plus 15 min for questions.
- Partner evaluation. After the teaching activity, a short test of 5 min is carried out by the student who acted as a student, evaluating the other student’s class development while he was acting as a teacher.
- Test 1. A general test with simple questions about both topics is undertaken after the students’ partner evaluation.
- Teacher explanation. In the class following the activity, the teacher comments on the most important aspects of the two topics. Questions are answered, and mistakes from Test 1 are solved.
- Test 2. The state of training is assessed through a second evaluation.
- Satisfaction survey. After Test 2, a questionnaire about the activity is completed.
2.4.1. Topic Selection
|Group A 2021/2022||U-boat XXI (Figure 4)||Provide information about the building of the German Second World War Submarine|
|Group B 2021/2022||Ship Work Break-down Structure (SWBS)||Explain the use of a system oriented to describe the shipbuilding products|
|Group A 2022/2023||Building shipyards in Asia||Provide information about the most relevant shipyards in Asia during 2021|
|Group B 2022/2023||Building shipyards in Europe||Provide information about the most relevant shipyards in Europe during 2021|
2.4.2. Group Distribution
2.4.3. Topic Preparation and Oral Presentation
2.4.4. Partner Evaluation
- PE1. Was the lesson well explained?
- PE2. Did the teacher (relative to the other member group student) clearly solve any doubts?
- PE3. What would you suggest to the teacher (relative to the other member group student) for improving their presentation?
- PE4. From 1 out of 10 (1 being the worst grade and 10 being the best grade), assess the quality of the other member’s lesson.
- PE5. From 1 out of 10 (1 being the worst grade and 10 being the best grade), evaluate the clarity and understanding of the other member’s answers to your questions.
- PE6. From 1 out of 10 (1 being the worst grade and 10 being the best grade), evaluate the teacher’s preparation for this activity.
2.4.5. Test 1
2.4.6. Test 2
2.4.7. Satisfaction Survey
- HS1. Was this way of learning interesting to you?
- HS2. Would you change something from this methodology?
- HS3. What difficulties did you face with this activity?
- HS4. What was the easiest part of the activity?
- HS5. Free comments about this activity.
2.4.8. Data Analysis
3.2. Task Comparison
3.3. Partner Evaluation Results
3.4. Test 1 and Test 2 Results
3.5. Satisfaction Survey
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Díaz, F.M.d.M. Metodologías de Enseñanzas y Aprendizaje Para el Desarrollo de Competencias: Orientaciones Para el Profesorado Universitario Ante el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior; Alianza. 2006. Available online: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/libro?codigo=293088 (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Canaleta, X.; Vernet, D.; Vicent, L.; Montero, J.A. Master in Teacher Training: A real implementation of Active Learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 651–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abad-Segura, E.; González-Zamar, M.D. Análisis de las competencias en la educación superior a través de flipped classroom. RIEOEI 2019, 80, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akçayır, G.; Akçayır, M. The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Comput. Educ. 2018, 126, 334–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kokotsaki, D.; Menzies, V.; Wiggins, A. Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improv. Sch. 2016, 19, 267–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Onyon, C. Problem-based learning: A review of the educational and psychological theory. Clin. Teach. 2012, 9, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez-Sánchez, J.; Senent-Aparicio, J.; Jimeno-Sáez, P. The application of spreadsheets for teaching hydrological modeling and climate change impacts on streamflow. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2022, 30, 1510–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nah, F.F.-H.; Zeng, Q.; Telaprolu, V.R.; Ayyappa, A.P.; Eschenbrenner, B. Gamification of Education: A Review of Literature. In HCI in Business; Springer: Cham, Seitzerland, 2014; pp. 401–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Felder, R.M.; Brent, R. How to Improve Teaching Quality. Qual. Manag. J. 1999, 6, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Douglas, J.; Douglas, A. Evaluating Teaching Quality. Qual. High. Educ. 2006, 12, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rimm-Kaufman, S.E.; Hamre, B.K. The Role of Psychological and Developmental Science in Efforts to Improve Teacher Quality. Teach. Coll. Rec. 2010, 112, 2988–3023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broder, J.M.; Dorfman, J.H. Determinants of teaching quality: What’s important to students? Res. High Educ. 1994, 35, 235–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salgado, S.; Au-Yong-Oliveira, M. Student Burnout: A Case Study about a Portuguese Public University. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ter Beek, M.; Wopereis, I.; Schildkamp, K. Don’t Wait, Innovate! Preparing Students and Lecturers in Higher Education for the Future Labor Market. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lomba, E.A.; Alves, J.M.; Cabral, I. Systematic Literature Review of Innovative Schools: A Map and a Characterization from Which We Learn. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Markham, T.; Larmer, J.; Ravitz, J.L. Project Based Learning Handbook: A Guide to Standards-Focused Project Based Learning for Middle and High School Teachers; Buck Institute for Education: Novato, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Rasul, S.; Bukhsh, Q.; Batool, S. A study to analyze the effectiveness of audio visual aids in teaching learning process at uvniversity level. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 28, 78–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Baldevenites, E.V.L.; Sánchez, E.E.L.; Lucero, S.I. El uso de la plataforma de videos Tik Tok como recurso pedagógico de enseñanza multidisciplinaria. In Proceedings of the VIII Jornadas Iberoamericanas de Innovación Educativa en el Ámbito de las tic y LAS TAC (INNOEDUCATIC 2021), Virtual, 18–19 November 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Zachos, G.; Paraskevopoulou-Kollia, E.-A.; Anagnostopoulos, I. Social Media Use in Higher Education: A Review. Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Peruta, A.; Shields, A.B. Social media in higher education: Understanding how colleges and universities use Facebook. J. Mark. High. Educ. 2017, 27, 131–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dabner, N. ‘Breaking Ground’ in the use of social media: A case study of a university earthquake response to inform educational design with Facebook. Internet High. Educ. 2012, 15, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thoonen, E.E.J.; Sleegers, P.J.C.; Peetsma, T.T.D.; Oort, F.J. Can teachers motivate students to learn? Educ. Stud. 2011, 37, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gynnild, V.; Holstad, A.; Myrhaug, D. Identifying and promoting self-regulated learning in higher education: Roles and responsibilities of student tutors. Mentor. Tutoring Partnersh. Learn. 2008, 16, 147–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunhaver, S.R.; Korte, R.F.; Barley, S.R.; Sheppard, S.D. Bridging the Gaps between Engineering Education and Practice. In US Engineering in a Global Economy; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2018; pp. 129–163. Available online: https://www.nber.org/books-and-chapters/us-engineering-global-economy/bridging-gaps-between-engineering-education-and-practice (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Castedo, R.; López, L.M.; Chiquito, M.; Navarro, J.; Cabrera, J.D.; Ortega, M.F. Flipped classroom—Comparative case study in engineering higher education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2019, 27, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Kenwright, D.; Dai, W.; Osborne, E.; Gladman, T.; Gallagher, P.; Grainger, R. “Just tell me what I need to know to pass the exam!” Can active flipped learning overcome passivity? TAPS 2017, 2, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ridder-Symoens, H. A History of the University in Europe. Available online: https://www.cambridge.org/core/series/history-of-the-university-in-europe/C47CA1B6629F8A753C3330F38EC43435 (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Konopka, C.L.; Adaime, M.B.; Mosele, P.H. Active Teaching and Learning Methodologies: Some Considerations. Creat. Educ. 2015, 6, 1536–1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety, 1st ed.; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Cziksentmihalyi, M. Flow–The Psychology of Optimal Experience. 1990. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224927532_Flow_The_Psychology_of_Optimal_Experience (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Whitman, N.A. Peer Teaching: To Teach Is to Learn Twice; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Goldschmid, B.; Goldschmid, M.L. Peer teaching in higher education: A review. High Educ. 1976, 5, 9–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aslan, S. Is Learning by Teaching Effective in Gaining 21st Century Skills? The Views of Pre-Service Science Teachers. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 2015, 15, 1441–1457. [Google Scholar]
- Grzega, J.; Schöner, M. The didactic model LdL (Lernen durch Lehren) as a way of preparing students for communication in a knowledge society. J. Educ. Teach. 2008, 34, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roberts, V.; Malone, K.; Moore, P.; Russell-Webster, T.; Caulfield, R. Peer teaching medical students during a pandemic. Med. Educ. Online 2020, 25, 1772014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sotgiu, M.A.; Bandiera, P.; Mazzarello, V.; Saderi, L.; Montella, A.; Moxham, B.J. Medical Student Perceptions of Near Peer Teaching within an Histology Course at the University of Sassari, Italy. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdulrahman, K.A.B.; Alfadhel, M.A.; Alswayed, K.E.; Al-Thakfan, N.A. Student as a Clinical Teacher: Evaluation of Peer Teaching Experience in Clinical Education. Med. Res. Arch. 2022, 10, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fletcher, A.; Kickbusch, S.; Huijser, H. Authentic learning using mobile applications and contemporary geospatial information requirements related to Environmental Science. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 2022, 46, 185–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solís, P.; Huynh, N.T.; Huot, P.; Zeballos, M.; Ng, A.; Menkiti, N. Towards an overdetermined design for informal high school girls’ learning in geospatial technologies for climate change. Int. Res. Geogr. Environ. Educ. 2019, 28, 151–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harris, B.N.; McCarthy, P.C.; Wright, A.M.; Schutz, H.; Boersma, K.S.; Shepherd, S.L.; Manning, L.A.; Malisch, J.L.; Ellington, R.M. From panic to pedagogy: Using online active learning to promote inclusive instruction in ecology and evolutionary biology courses and beyond. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 10, 12581–12612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maccabe, R.; Fonseca, T.D. ‘Lightbulb’ moments in higher education: Peer-to-peer support in engineering education. Mentor. Tutoring Partnersh. Learn. 2021, 29, 453–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Benedetti, M.; Plumb, S.; Beck, S.B.M. Effective use of peer teaching and self-reflection for the pedagogical training of graduate teaching assistants in engineering. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2022, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muñoz-García, M.A.; Moreda, G.P.; Hernández-Sánchez, N.; Valiño, V. Student Reciprocal Peer Teaching as a Method for Active Learning: An Experience in an Electrotechnical Laboratory. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2013, 22, 729–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Blake, J. Asynchronous Peer Teaching Using Student-Created Multimodal Materials. IJIET 2021, 11, 286–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Hamad, M.Q.; Mbaidin, H.O.; AlHamad, A.Q.M.; Alshurideh, M.T.; Kurdi, B.H.A.; Al-Hamad, N.Q. Investigating students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning in higher education in UAE during Coronavirus-19 pandemic. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 2021, 321–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galván-Cardoso, A.; Siado-Ramos, E. Educación Tradicional: Un modelo de enseñanza centrado en el estudiante. CIENCIAMATRIA 2021, 7, 962–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tonuci, F. ¿Enseñar O Aprender?: La escuela Como Investigación Quince Años Después: 009; IRIF, SL-Edit.: Graó, Spain, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Tejeiro, R.; Gómez-Vallecillo, J.L.; Romero, A.F.; Pelegrina, M.; Wallace, A.; Emberley, E. Summative self-assessment in higher education: Implications of its counting towards the final mark. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 2012, 10, 789–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Förster, M.; Maur, A.; Weiser, C.; Winkel, K. Pre-class video watching fosters achievement and knowledge retention in a flipped classroom. Comput. Educ. 2022, 179, 104399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velegol, S.B.; Zappe, S.E.; Mahoney, E. The Evolution of a Flipped Classroom: Evidence-Based Recommendations. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2015, 4, n3. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1076140 (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Uboot Tipo XXI. Available online: https://www.u-historia.com/uhistoria/historia/articulos/21historia/tipo21/tipoXXI.htm (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- La Construcción en Secciones del Submarino del Tipo XXI. Available online: https://www.u-historia.com/uhistoria/tecnico/articulos/21tecnico/secciones/secciones.htm (accessed on 18 February 2023).
- Campbell, K.S.; Mothersbaugh, D.L.; Brammer, C.; Taylor, T. Peer versus Self Assessment of Oral Business Presentation Performance. Bus. Commun. Q. 2001, 64, 23–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kakepoto, I.; Habil, H.; Omar, N.A.M.; Said, H. Factors that Influence Oral Presentations of Engineering Students of Pakistan for Workplace Environment. Inf. Knowl. Manag. 2012, 2, 70. [Google Scholar]
- Sheth, T.D. Communication Skill: A Prerequisite for Engineers. Int. J. Stud. Engl. Lang. Lit. 2015, 3, 51–54. [Google Scholar]
- Alonso, D.M.; García, N.B.; Nieto, J.E.S. El proceso de creación curricular en estudiantes de Educación Secundaria. Una Indagación Narrat. Profr Rev. Currículum Form. Del Profr. 2019, 23, 377–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bušljeta, R. Effective Use of Teaching and Learning Resources. Czech-Pol. Hist. Pedagog. J. 2013, 5, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Gonzalez-DeHass, A.R.; Willems, P.P.; Holbein, M.F.D. Examining the Relationship between Parental Involvement and Student Motivation. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2005, 17, 99–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abernathy, T.V.; Vineyard, R.N. Academic Competitions in Science: What Are the Rewards for Students? Clear. House A J. Educ. Strateg. Issues Ideas 2001, 74, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Domínguez, A.; Saenz-de-Navarrete, J.; de-Marcos, L.; Fernández-Sanz, L.; Pagés, C.; Martínez-Herráiz, J.-J. Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Comput. Educ. 2013, 63, 380–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyadanu, S.D.; Garglo, M.Y.; Adampah, T.; Garglo, R.L. The Impact of Lecturer-Student Relationship on Self-Esteem and Academic Performance at Higher Education. JSSS 2014, 2, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Torres-Martín, C.; Acal, C.; El-Homrani, M.; Mingorance-Estrada, Á.C. Implementation of the flipped classroom and its longitudinal impact on improving academic performance. Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 2022, 70, 909–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, R.; Perényi, Á.; Birdthistle, N. The positive relationship between flipped and blended learning and student engagement, performance and satisfaction. Act. Learn. High. Educ. 2021, 22, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Oliván Blázquez, B.; Masluk, B.; Gascon, S.; Fueyo Díaz, R.; Aguilar-Latorre, A.; Artola Magallón, I.; Magallón Botaya, R. The use of flipped classroom as an active learning approach improves academic performance in social work: A randomized trial in a university. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0214623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Lax, N.; Morris, J.; Kolber, B.J. A partial flip classroom exercise in a large introductory general biology course increases performance at multiple levels. J. Biol. Educ. 2017, 51, 412–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, A.P.; Castedo, R.; Alarcón, C.; Dios, K.S.; Chiquito, M.; España, I.; López, L.M. Development of Flipped Classroom model to improve the students’ performance. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, New York, NY, USA, 24–26 October 2018; pp. 703–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.H. On the relationships between behaviors and achievement in technology-mediated flipped classrooms: A two-phase online behavioral PLS-SEM model. Comput. Educ. 2019, 142, 103653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yılmaz, F.G.K.; Yılmaz, R. Exploring the role of sociability, sense of community and course satisfaction on students’ engagement in flipped classroom supported by facebook groups. J. Comput. Educ. 2023, 10, 135–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, J. Gamifying the flipped classroom: How to motivate Chinese ESL learners? Innov. Lang. Learn. Teach. 2020, 14, 421–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahin, A.; Cavlazoglu, B.; Zeytuncu, Y.E. Flipping a College Calculus Course: A Case Study. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2015, 18, 142–152. [Google Scholar]
- Cherif, H.A. Peer Teaching in Small Group Setting. Forw. Excell. 1993, 1, 5–6. [Google Scholar]
- Mok, H.N. Teaching tip: The flipped classroom. J. Inf. Syst. Educ. 2014, 25, 7–11. [Google Scholar]
- Colomo-Magaña, E.; Soto-Varela, R.; Ruiz-Palmero, J.; Gómez-García, M. University Students’ Perception of the Usefulness of the Flipped Classroom Methodology. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, H.-M.; Hsieh, P.-J.; Uden, L.; Yang, C.-H. A multilevel investigation of factors influencing university students’ behavioral engagement in flipped classrooms. Comput. Educ. 2021, 175, 104318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carpenetti, D.W. Peer Teaching in General Chemistry: Benefits to Information Retention and Lowered Student Anxiety. North Carol. Community Coll. J. Teach. Innov. 2022, 2, 21–42. [Google Scholar]
- Ruiz Moral, R.; García de Leonardo, C.; Cerro Pérez, A.; Caballero Martínez, F.; Monge Martín, D. Barriers to teaching communication skills in Spanish medical schools: A qualitative study with academic leaders. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Adams, R.V.; Blair, E. Impact of Time Management Behaviors on Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Performance. SAGE Open 2019, 9, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Swart, A.J.; Lombard, K.; de Jager, H. Exploring the relationship between time management skills and the academic achievement of African engineering students—A case study. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2010, 35, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|Sum of Squares||df||Mean Square||F||Sig.|
|Sum of Squares||df||Mean Square||F||Sig.|
|PE1.||90% of students answer affirmative|
|PE3.||The main concern was the nervousness of the students during the presentation.|
|HS1.||Only one student in the 2 years indicated no.|
|HS2.||About 30% indicated that they needed more time to prepare the activity. Twenty percent indicated that they did not have previous knowledge to develop this activity sufficiently.|
|HS3.||About 80% of the students indicated that the 30 min of speech was complicated.|
About 40% of the students indicated that they did not understand some information while they were preparing.
|HS4.||No relevant information was obtained.|
|HS5.||About 20% complained about the activity. They said that they must spend time developing the activity and that they were busy. |
About 40% indicated that they had difficulty speaking in public.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Díaz Ojeda, H.R.; Pérez-Arribas, F.; Pérez-Sánchez, J. Student–Teacher Role Reversal at University Level—An Experience in Naval Engineering Education. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 352. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040352
Díaz Ojeda HR, Pérez-Arribas F, Pérez-Sánchez J. Student–Teacher Role Reversal at University Level—An Experience in Naval Engineering Education. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(4):352. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040352Chicago/Turabian Style
Díaz Ojeda, Héctor Rubén, Francisco Pérez-Arribas, and Julio Pérez-Sánchez. 2023. "Student–Teacher Role Reversal at University Level—An Experience in Naval Engineering Education" Education Sciences 13, no. 4: 352. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040352