TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?

Önder Karamert; Özden Demirkan

doi:10.55020/iojpe.1764363

TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?

Abstract

Gamification plays an important role in flipped learning environments. Recent studies underscore the effectiveness of gamified approaches within these settings, but also indicate that most designs for gamification are predominantly digital-based. This study aims to explore the competition between tangible (physical) and intangible (digital) forms of gamification in the context of flipped learning. Specifically, it assesses the impact of both tangible and intangible gamified flipped learning approaches on students’ mathematical literacy self-efficacy beliefs and their engagement levels towards learning activities. The study group for this quasi-experimental study was composed of 69 fifth-grade students from a public school in Türkiye. The study group was separated into three groups: two experimental groups (tangible and intangible) and one control group. The findings indicate that both tangible and intangible gamification in a flipped learning environment have a positive impact on students’ personal experience of their mathematical literacy self-efficacy beliefs. However, neither approach had a significant impact on students’ engagement levels. These results suggest that gamified flipped learning could be an effective strategy for enhancing students’ personal experience of their mathematical literacy self-efficacy beliefs at the primary education level. The study provides pedagogical implications based on these results and offers recommendations for future research.

Keywords

Gamification, flipped learning, primary education.

Ethical Statement

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Gazi University (dated 06.03.2023 and numbered E.603958) and the Governorship of Düzce (dated 13.04.2023 and numbered E-10240236-20-74353790). Canva design tools were used to develop gamification elements and research visuals. The authors would like to thank the Gazi University Academic Writing Application and Research Center for proofreading the manuscript. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

Ahmed, H. D., & Asiksoy, G. (2021). The effects of gamified flipped learning method on student’s innovation skills, self-efficacy towards virtual physics lab course and perceptions. Sustainability, 13(18), 10163. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810163
Aldrich, J. O., & Cunningham, J. B. (2016). Using IBM SPSS statistics: An interactive hands-on approach (2nd ed.). Sage.
Arsyad, S., Waluyo, B., & Maisarah, I. (2024). Enhancing TOEFL performance and student motivation through integrated flipped and gamified learning in online settings. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2024(1), 1054242. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1054242
Bakker, A., Cai, J., & Zenger, L. (2021). Future themes of mathematics education research: An international survey before and during the pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10049-w
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586-598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586
Baypınar, K., & Tarım, K. (2019). The development of mathematical literacy self-efficacy scale for middle school: a reliability and validity study. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 48(1), 878-909. https://doi.org/10.14812/cufej.415291
Behl, A., Jayawardena, N., Pereira, V., Islam, N., Del Giudice, M., & Choudrie, J. (2022). Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176, 121445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2023). Flip your classroom, revised edition: Reach every student in every class every day. ASCD.
Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In 2013 ASEE annual conference & exposition (pp. 23-1200).

Bolstad, O. H. (2023). Lower secondary students’ encounters with mathematical literacy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 35(1), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00386-7
Boyd D. G., & Bee H. L. (2014) The developing child. Pearson Education.
Buchner, A. (2022). Moodle 4 Administration: An administrator’s guide to configuring, securing, customizing, and extending Moodle. Packt.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (1998). Kovaryans analizi (Varyans analizi ile karşılaştırmalı bir inceleme) [Analysis of covariance (A comparative analysis with analysis of variance).]. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 31(1), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000247
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Data analysis handbook for the social sciences] (24th ed.). Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing
Candel, E. C., de la Pena, C., & Yuste, B. C. (2024). Pre-service teachers’ perception of active learning methodologies in history: Flipped classroom and gamification in an e-learning environment. Education and Information Technologies, 29(3), 3365-3387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11924-0
Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2022). Student engagement in a flipped secondary mathematics classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(7), 1455-1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10213-x
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer.
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445
Cole, J., & Foster, H. (2007). Using Moodle: Teaching with the popular open source course management system. O’Reilly.
Conde, M. A., Aguilar, D. A. G., Pozo de Dios, A. D., & Penalvo, F. J. G. (2010). Moodle 2.0 web services layer and its new application contexts. In International Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (pp. 110-116). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13166-0_16
Costello, E. (2013). Opening up to open source: Looking at how Moodle was adopted in higher education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2013.856289
Daliranfirouz, E., Amiryousefi, M., Geld, R., & Ansari, D. N. (2024). Gamified-flipped English classes and L2 learners’ achievement and perceptions. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2024.2374356
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9–15). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Do, M., Sanford, K., Roseff, S., Hovaguimian, A., Besche, H., & Fischer, K. (2023). Gamified versus non-gamified online educational modules for teaching clinical laboratory medicine to first-year medical students at a large allopathic medical school in the United States. BMC Medical Education, 23(1), 959. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04951-5
Dodero, G., Gennari, R., Melonio, A., & Torello, S. (2014). Towards tangible gamified co-design at school: two studies in primary schools. In Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI annual symposium on Computer-human interaction in play (pp. 77-86). https://doi.org/10.1145/2658537.2658688
Dominguez, A., Saenz de Navarrete, J., de Marcos, L., Fernandez-Sanz, L., Pages, C., & Martinez-Herraiz, J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63, 380-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
Ekici, M. (2021). A systematic review of the use of gamification in flipped learning. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 3327-3346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10394-y
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Gennari, R., Melonio, A., & Torello, S. (2017). Gamified probes for cooperative learning: A case study. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 76, 4925-4949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3543-7
Ghafouri, R., Zamanzadeh, V., & Nasiri, M. (2024). Comparison of education using the flipped class, gamification and gamification in the flipped learning environment on the performance of nursing students in a client health assessment: A randomized clinical trial. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), 949. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05966-2
Graven, M., Venkat, H., & Bowie, L. (2023). Analysing the citizenship agenda in Mathematical literacy school exit assessments. ZDM Mathematics Education, 55(5), 1021-1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01448-1
Gutierrez-Gonzalez, R., Zamarron, A., Royuela, A., & Rodriguez-Boto, G. (2023). Flipped classroom applied to Neurosurgery in undergraduate medical education. BMC Medical Education, 23(1), 170. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04158-8
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025-3034). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377
Hanus, M., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
Hao, X., & Fang, F. (2024). Learners’ speaking self-efficacy, self-efficacy sources and their relations in the traditional and flipped instructional modes. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2414051
Hopkins, K. D., & Weeks, D. L. (1990). Tests for normality and measures of skewness and kurtosis: Their place in research reporting. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50(4), 717-729. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164490504001
Höfer, T., & Beckmann, A. (2009). Supporting mathematical literacy: examples from a cross-curricular project. ZDM Mathematics Education, 41(1), 223-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0117-9
Huang, B., Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2019). Investigating the effects of gamification-enhanced flipped learning on undergraduate students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement. Interactive learning environments, 27(8), 1106-1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653
Huang, Y. H., Hsia, L. H., & Hwang, G. J. (2026). A gamified AI movement assessment and feedback approach for university students in physical education: Effects on movement skills, learning engagement, and behavioral patterns. Education and Information Technologies, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-026-13911-7
Hwang, G. J., Lai, C. L., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Seamless flipped learning: a mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of computers in education, 2(4), 449-473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0043-0
Jablonka, E. (2015). The evolvement of numeracy and mathematical literacy curricula and the construction of hierarchies of numerate or mathematically literate subjects. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47, 599-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0691-6
Jansen, A., Curtis, K., Mohammad-Mirzaei, A., Cullicott, C. E., Smith, E. P., & Middleton, J. A. (2023). Secondary mathematics teachers’ descriptions of student engagement. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 113(3), 425-442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10228-x
Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons.
Karamert, Ö., & Kuyumcu-Vardar, A. (2021). The effect of gamification on young mathematics learners’ achievements and attitudes. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 4(2), 96-114. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.904704
Kline, R.B. (2023). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). The Guilford.
Li, Z., & Li, J. (2022). Using the flipped classroom to promote learner engagement for the sustainable development of language skills: A mixed-methods study. Sustainability, 14(10), 5983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105983
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2020). A comparison of flipped learning with gamification, traditional learning, and online independent study: the effects on students’ mathematics achievement and cognitive engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 464-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1541910
Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2021). Student engagement in mathematics flipped classrooms: Implications of journal publications from 2011 to 2020. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 672610. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.672610
Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Chen, G. (2017). Toward a set of design principles for mathematics flipped classrooms: A synthesis of research in mathematics education. Educational Research Review, 22, 50-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.002
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice (Vol. 28). John Wiley & Sons.
Majuri, J., Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2018). Gamification of education and learning: A review of empirical literature. In Proceedings of the 2nd international GamiFIN conference, GamiFIN 2018. CEUR-WS (pp. 11-19).
Manzano-Leon, A., Camacho-Lazarraga, P., Guerrero, M. A., Guerrero-Puerta, L., Aguilar-Parra, J. M., Trigueros, R., & Alias, A. (2021). Between level up and game over: A systematic literature review of gamification in education. Sustainability, 13(2247). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042247
Marell-Olsson, E. (2021). Using gamification as an online teaching strategy to develop students’ 21st century skills. IxD&A: Interaction Design and Architecture (s), (47), 69-93.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] [MoNE]. (2018). Matematik dersi öğretim programı (1-8. Sınıflar) [Mathematics course curriculum - 1st-8th Grades]. MoNE. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=329
Ng, L. K., & Lo, C. K. (2023). Enhancing online instructional approaches for sustainable business education in the current and post-pandemic era: An action research study of student engagement. Education Sciences, 13(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010042
OECD - Organisation for economic co-operation and development. (2022). The PISA 2022 mathematics framework. OECD.
Özgen, K. (2013). An analysis of high school students’ mathematical literacy self-efficacy beliefs in relation to their learning styles. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22, 91-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0030-4
Özgen, K., & Bindak, R. (2011). Determination of self-efficacy beliefs of high school students towards math literacy. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(2), 1085-1089.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.193
Pan, Z., Wang, K., Zhu, J., & Smith, M. (2026). Levels, stickers, and strategies: how gamified math tasks foster elementary student engagement. Education and Information Technologies, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13866-1
Pratiwi, D. I., Fitriati, S. W., Yuliasri, I., & Waluyo, B. (2024). Flipped classroom with gamified technology and paper-based method for teaching vocabulary. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 9(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00222-4
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690
Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Copeland, C. B. (2022). Student engagement: The importance of the classroom context. In A. L. Reschly, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 529–544). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07853-8_25
Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2022). Jingle-jangle revisited: History and further evolution of the student engagement construct. In A. L. Reschly, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 3–24). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07853-8_1
Sailer, M., & Sailer, M. (2021). Gamification of in‐class activities in flipped classroom lectures. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12948
Sanz-Angulo, P., Galindo-Melero, J., De-Diego-Poncela, S., & Martin, O. (2025). Promoting soft skills in higher engineering education: Assessment of the impact of a teaching methodology based on flipped learning, cooperative work and gamification. Education and Information Technologies, 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13322-0
Sargent, J., & Casey, A. (2020). Flipped learning, pedagogy and digital technology: Establishing consistent practice to optimise lesson time. European Physical Education Review, 26(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X19826603
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Pearson.
Sever, M. (2014). Adapting classroom engagement inventory into Turkish culture. Education and Science, 39(176), 171-182. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3627
Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement. Educational Psychologist, 44(4), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233
Stipek, D., & Gralinski, H. (1996). Children’s beliefs about intelligence and school performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(3), 397-407.
Talbert, R. (2017). Flipped learning: A guide for higher education faculty. Stylus.
Taşpınar, M. (2017). Sosyal Bilimlerde SPSS uygulamalı nicel veri analizi [Applied quantitative data analysis using SPSS in social sciences]. Pegem.
Thongmak, M. (2019). The student experience of student-centered learning methods: Comparing gamification and flipped classroom. Education for Information, 35(2), 99-127. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-18018
Throndsen, J. E., Shumway, J. F., & Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (2020). The relationship between mathematical literacy at kindergarten entry and public preschool attendance, type, and quality. Early Childhood Education Journal, 48, 473-483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-01014-7
Wang, Z., Bergin, C., & Bergin, D. A. (2014). Measuring engagement in fourth to twelfth grade classrooms: The classroom engagement inventory. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4), 517-535. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000050
Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012). For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Digital.
Xiao, R., Wu, Z., & Hamari, J. (2021). Internet-of-gamification: A review of literature on ıot-enabled gamification for user engagement. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1990517
Xiao, Y., & Hew, K. F. T. (2024). Intangible rewards versus tangible rewards in gamified online learning: Which promotes student intrinsic motivation, behavioural engagement, cognitive engagement and learning performance?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 297-317. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13361
Yllana-Prieto, F., Jeong, J. S., & Gonzalez-Gomez, D. (2021). An online-based edu-escape room: A comparison study of a multidimensional domain of PSTs with flipped sustainability-stem contents. Sustainability, 13(3), 1032. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031032
Yu, Q., & Yu, K. (2024). The effects of gamified flipped classroom on student learning: evidence from a meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5126-5141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209791
Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujahat, M., & Perera, C. J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30, 100326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326
Zainuddin, Z., Farida, R., Keumala, C. M., Kurniawan, R., & Iskandar, H. (2022). Synchronous online flip learning with formative gamification quiz: instruction during COVID-19. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 19(2), 236-259. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2021-0002
Zakariya, Y. F. (2022). Improving students’ mathematics self-efficacy: A systematic review of intervention studies. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 986622. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.986622
Zeng, C. (2025). The effects of students’ backgrounds, attitudes, and ICT familiarity on mathematical literacy: Latent profile analysis and lasso regression. Education and Information Technologies, 30(5), 5451-5475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13028-9
Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. O’Reilly.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-Efficacy and Educational Development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies, (pp. 202-231). Cambridge University.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016
Zou, D. (2020). Gamified flipped EFL classroom for primary education: Student and teacher perceptions. Journal of Computers in Education, 7(2), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00153-w

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Classroom Education, Primary Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Önder Karamert ^*
0000-0002-6882-7843
Türkiye

Özden Demirkan
0000-0002-7201-6410
Türkiye

Publication Date

March 31, 2026

Submission Date

August 13, 2025

Acceptance Date

March 30, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 15 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.55020/iojpe.1764363

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA52XP52EX

APA

Karamert, Ö., & Demirkan, Ö. (2026). TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS? International Online Journal of Primary Education, 15(1), 56-80. https://doi.org/10.55020/iojpe.1764363

AMA

1.Karamert Ö, Demirkan Ö. TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS? Int. Online J. Prim. Educ. 2026;15(1):56-80. doi:10.55020/iojpe.1764363

Chicago

Karamert, Önder, and Özden Demirkan. 2026. “TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?”. International Online Journal of Primary Education 15 (1): 56-80. https://doi.org/10.55020/iojpe.1764363.

EndNote

Karamert Ö, Demirkan Ö (March 1, 2026) TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS? International Online Journal of Primary Education 15 1 56–80.

IEEE

[1]Ö. Karamert and Ö. Demirkan, “TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?”, Int. Online J. Prim. Educ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 56–80, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.55020/iojpe.1764363.

ISNAD

Karamert, Önder - Demirkan, Özden. “TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?”. International Online Journal of Primary Education 15/1 (March 1, 2026): 56-80. https://doi.org/10.55020/iojpe.1764363.

JAMA

1.Karamert Ö, Demirkan Ö. TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS? Int. Online J. Prim. Educ. 2026;15:56–80.

MLA

Karamert, Önder, and Özden Demirkan. “TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS?”. International Online Journal of Primary Education, vol. 15, no. 1, Mar. 2026, pp. 56-80, doi:10.55020/iojpe.1764363.

Vancouver

1.Önder Karamert, Özden Demirkan. TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE: IS THAT A DILEMMA FOR GAMIFIED FLIPPED LEARNING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS? Int. Online J. Prim. Educ. 2026 Mar. 1;15(1):56-80. doi:10.55020/iojpe.1764363

Creative Commons Licenses

All articles published in International Online Journal of Primary Education's content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).