Comparison of performance due to guided hyperlearning, unguided hyperlearning, and conventional learning in mathematics: an empirical study
In this paper, the use of guided hyperlearning, unguided hyperlearning, and conventional learning methods in mathematics are compared. The design of the research involved a quasi-experiment with a modified single-factor multiple treatment design comparing the three learning methods, guided hyperlearning, unguided hyperlearning, and conventional learning. The participants were from three first-year university classes, numbering 115 students in total. Each group received guided, unguided, or conventional learning methods in one of the three different topics, namely number systems, functions, and graphing. The students' academic performance differed according to the type of learning. Evaluation of the three methods revealed that only guided hyperlearning and conventional learning were appropriate methods for the psychomotor aspects of drawing in the graphing topic. There was no significant difference between the methods when learning the cognitive aspects involved in the number systems topic and the functions topic.