October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

within a variety of forms of the IBL setting, but some were implemented within both Internet-based and traditional F2F learning conditions. It was proposed that different extents of students’ ASE may have been derived from the differences in these learning environments. The studies involving ASE&IBL issues are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Summary of ASE&IBL research in alphabetic order. (* = included in both ISE and ASE&IBL categories; exp=experimental design) Author Purpose Participants Method *Brown et al. To find ISE changes through GlobalEd Project 234 high school survey (2003) students in US Crippen & Earl (2007) To create an Internet-based program which improves user performance and supports well-structured problem solving Farel et al. (2001) To show IBL effect on professional development and practice Francescato et al. To compare learners’ ASE between collaborative F2F (2006) and IBL groups Francescato et al. To compare learners’ self-efficacy in developing (2007) professional skills in collaborative F2F and IBL courses *Joo et al. (2000) To test the applicability of self-efficacy theory to contexts of IBL Kitsantas & Chow (2007) Meyer et al. (2002) To examine how ASE varied across four different instructional environments To assess the impact of using the Internet-based setting where elders provided tutoring for students Sins et al. (2008) To test relations among learners’ AS, goal orientation, cognitive processing, and achievement in collaborative IBL Tai (2006) To test how the effect of training framing from supervisors on trainees’ AS may influence the overall effectiveness *Thompson et al. To examine the relationship between learners’ self- (2002) efficacy and their search task performance Waldman (2003) To examine the role AS played in students’ use of the Yukselturk & Bulut (2007) library's electronic resources To examine relationship among learner selected variables, AS, self-regulated learning, and their success in IBL Relations between ASE and IBL processes/outcomes 66 university students in US 28 staffs in US exp 50 university students in Italy 166 university students in Italy 152 junior high school students in Korea 472 college students in US 12 adults (62-80 yrs old) and 60 5th‐graders in US 60 pre-university science majors in Holland 126 employees in Taiwan 90 undergraduate students in US 340 university students in US 80 online students in Turkey quasi-exp exp survey interview survey quasi-exp exp survey exp exp survey survey interview As stated, a number of studies (i.e. Sins et al., 2008; Waldman, 2003; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2007) have explored how ASE, coupled with other motivational constructs, plays a role in students’ successful IBL. That is, they have sought to find out how ASE may be associated with students’ IBL processes or IBL outcomes. Sins et al. (2008) tested 60 11 th -grade students’ conceptual model of the relationship between students’ achievement goal orientation and their ASE with respect to a modeling task in an Internet-based setting, where learners could collaborate online by means of a synchronous chat on inquiry assignments for science courses. The study found that learners’ mastery-approach goal orientation and their ASE were both positively related to their achievement in the modeling task and their use of deep cognitive processes. Similarly, in an attempt to find out what might influence students’ IBL of programming, Yukselturk and Bulut (2007) analyzed and examined the relationship among 80 online learners’ selected variables (i.e. gender, age, 229
educational level, locus of control, and learning style), motivational beliefs (i.e. intrinsic goal orientation, extrinsic goal orientation, control beliefs, task values, self-efficacy, and test anxiety), self-regulated learning components, and their success in an Internet-based setting. The study result showed that although learners’ ASE and their intrinsic goal orientation beliefs were correlated with their IBL success, they did not enter the final prediction model in the regression analyses. This finding was somewhat contradictory to Pintrich and de Groot’s (1990) research outcomes, in which respondents’ ASE and their intrinsic motivation significantly affected their achievement. In a similar way, to encourage students to use library facilities and electronic resources, Waldman (2003) conducted a study to understand what factors may have promoted students to seek out information in a library setting. Previous research showed that students’ ASE might be related to their academic achievement outcomes (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1996). Therefore, Waldman (2003) analyzed 340 university freshmen’s responses concerning their library/computer usage and their ASE. The research finding showed that the students who expressed interest in learning about the library’s electronic resources were more likely to have higher ASE for completing the learning task. Moreover, students with higher ASE for completing the task tended to use the library more often. The study outcome was consistent with other research on self-efficacy (e.g. Ren, 2000), suggesting that self-efficacious students have a tendency to be more active in academic work and to use resources available to them. Finally, Thompson, Meriac, and Cope (2002) examined the relationship between learners’ self-efficacy (including both general ISE and ASE) and their search task performance in the IBL condition. A total of 90 participants were required to search the Internet and to list the names of the industrial-organizational psychologists they found. The findings indicated that the improvement in both ISE and ASE could lead to higher online performance. Alteration of ASE by IBL Whereas the research discussed above mainly deals with how ASE may influence or be related to students’ learning processes and outcomes in an Internet-based setting, the following studies observe how ASE may be altered in different Internet-related learning conditions. It was found that some studies measured the learners’ ASE within IBL conditions only (e.g. Crippen & Earl, 2007; Meyer et al., 2002), while others intended to compare learners’ differences of ASE between traditional F2F classroom settings and Internet-based situations (e.g. Francescato et al., 2006, 2007; Kitsantas & Chow, 2007). Crippen and Earl (2007), Meyer et al. (2002), and Tai (2006) have evaluated participants’ ASE among Internet-based conditions only. Crippen and Earl (2007) described a quasi-experimental study, wherein expert modeling was believed to improve ASE, and worked examples served as expert models in their study. A total of 66 students were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a worked example group, a worked example/self-explanation group, and the control group. In the end, the combination of worked example with self-explanation prompt was reported to improve students’ performance, problem solving skills, and ASE in terms of whether personal goals were achieved. Meyer et al. (2002) assessed the impact of using a structured strategy as a base for an intergenerational Internet tutoring program, in which 12 older adults provided tutoring for 5th‐grade students to learn the strategy through an instructional Internet-based system. The structured strategy was considered to allow readers to build mental representations similar to the text’s hierarchical organization of important ideas. Sixty students were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (a) a tutoring group, in which the students worked on the Internet-based system using the structured strategy with a tutor; (b) a group in which the students worked independently on the same Internet-based instruction without a tutor; and (c) a control group, in which the students did not receive instruction in the structured strategy. The results showed that both tutors and children in the structured strategy group with tutors increased their ASE. Likewise, to examine the effects of training framing from supervisors on trainees’ ASE and training motivation in IBL, Tai (2006) surveyed 126 employees entering a training program introducing computer software operation and design, and further tested how these variables may have influenced the overall training effectiveness. The 126 employees were asked to complete a series of questionnaires at the beginning, the midpoint, and the end of the course. The results indicated that supervisors training framing could be used to predict trainees’ ASE. ,which subsequently affected their reactions, learning, and motivation. 230
Page 1 and 2:
October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4
Page 3 and 4:
Supporting Organizations Centre for
Page 5 and 6:
Time-Quality Tradeoff of Waiting St
Page 7 and 8:
Ibáñez, M. B., García, J. J., Ga
Page 9 and 10:
Situated learning. It states that k
Page 11 and 12:
executed in the client, the server
Page 13 and 14:
The participants were twelve non-na
Page 15 and 16:
Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S.
Page 17 and 18:
Theoretical background Feedback, is
Page 19 and 20:
There are already a number of tools
Page 21 and 22:
output used were blogs, written by
Page 23 and 24:
Question Table 2: Perceived Relevan
Page 25 and 26:
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Dev
Page 27 and 28:
detection, and analysis of affectiv
Page 29 and 30:
experience is a suitable method of
Page 31 and 32:
Collins, 1998). The appraisal theor
Page 33 and 34:
encompasses the finer shades of an
Page 35 and 36:
and can also track faces with glass
Page 37 and 38:
Acknowledgements This research was
Page 39 and 40:
Merill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Traft
Page 41 and 42:
to the above-discussed issues of th
Page 43 and 44:
The annotation part of the SDM onto
Page 45 and 46:
that enables the office users to ac
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 4. Semantic document browser
Page 49 and 50:
to the group’s shared semantic do
Page 51 and 52:
participants performed less mouse c
Page 53 and 54:
Bastili, V.R., Gianluigi, C., & Rom
Page 55 and 56:
esource contribution, enabling conv
Page 57 and 58:
Semantic Search In contrast to the
Page 59 and 60:
Participation: P i i i NiVadd Vde
Page 61 and 62:
and comment on each page as well. T
Page 63 and 64:
Table 1. Questionnaire results (N=2
Page 65 and 66:
propose for him, as well as calenda
Page 67 and 68:
Discussion and Conclusion Collabora
Page 69 and 70:
Sampson, D. G., & Zervas, P. (2011)
Page 71 and 72:
Obtaining: the first step of the li
Page 73 and 74:
process (Palmer & Richardson, 2004)
Page 75 and 76:
and ratings (the use of star rating
Page 77 and 78:
(K1) is the number of non-reusable
Page 79 and 80:
Case 3: The process of reusing a se
Page 81 and 82:
Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, Y. & Fukaz
Page 83 and 84:
to examine determinants for pre-ser
Page 85 and 86:
Overview of the model The first res
Page 87 and 88:
significance of relationships. All
Page 89 and 90:
Discussion This study represents a
Page 91 and 92:
Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw,
Page 93 and 94:
Ko, C.-C., Chiang, C.-H., Lin, Y.-L
Page 95 and 96:
Interestingly, the Universal Design
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 1. Framework of the TriAcces
Page 99 and 100:
Experiment This experiment aimed to
Page 101 and 102:
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for
Page 103 and 104:
Foulds, R., & Camacho, C. (2003). T
Page 105 and 106:
answer. However, students can choos
Page 107 and 108:
Hartley & Collins-Brown, 1999; Morl
Page 109 and 110:
Subjects Figure 4. Partial misconce
Page 111 and 112:
correct for a four-option MC item i
Page 113 and 114:
from −3 to 3 for any four-option
Page 115 and 116:
Kansup, W. (1973). A comparison of
Page 117 and 118:
The theory of mental models explain
Page 119 and 120:
computer-mediated counter-arguments
Page 121 and 122:
Learning in this study refers to, w
Page 123 and 124:
the experiment process was anonymou
Page 125 and 126:
supported. However, significant dif
Page 127 and 128:
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., &
Page 129 and 130:
Lee, Y.-H., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Hsu, C.
Page 131 and 132:
Many researchers have conducted emp
Page 133 and 134:
Trialability Some studies have empi
Page 135 and 136:
Results Instrument validation Two c
Page 137 and 138:
In this study, Amos 6.0 was employe
Page 139 and 140:
Our results strongly supported the
Page 141 and 142:
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981
Page 143 and 144:
Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., & Cres
Page 145 and 146:
What becomes clear from this short
Page 147 and 148:
Figure 1. Distribution of informati
Page 149 and 150:
Results In order to test the hypoth
Page 151 and 152:
esults of the present study with th
Page 153 and 154:
Kolbitsch, J., & Maurer, H. (2006).
Page 155 and 156:
A conceptual framework of this stud
Page 157 and 158:
eveal positive effects on students
Page 159 and 160:
learning resources; and able to acc
Page 161 and 162:
Discussion This study suggests that
Page 163 and 164:
146). Also, role of constructivist
Page 165 and 166:
eform strategy, namely, the MOE-Int
Page 167 and 168:
McNaughton, S. (2002). Meeting of m
Page 169 and 170:
Wu, T.-T., Sung, T.-W., Huang, Y.-M
Page 171 and 172:
Ubiquitous English-Reading Learning
Page 173 and 174:
include the number of times and ran
Page 175 and 176:
initial value for the predetermined
Page 177 and 178:
The following Eq. (18) expresses th
Page 179 and 180:
Limitations This experiment adopted
Page 181 and 182:
Table 3 shows the analysis of the p
Page 183 and 184: enhance learning outcomes, it impor
Page 185 and 186: Ogata, H., & Yano, Y. (2004a). Cont
Page 187 and 188: Communication seems to be more effe
Page 189 and 190: the audience only listened, one whe
Page 191 and 192: Step 5) Writing the story On the ba
Page 193 and 194: As indicated in Table 2, the differ
Page 195 and 196: References Armstrong, S. (2003). Th
Page 197 and 198: Goh, T.-T. (2011). Exploring Gender
Page 199 and 200: OPAC has been transformed into AirP
Page 201 and 202: Perceived Self-Efficacy Figure 3. H
Page 203 and 204: were asked to rate their confidence
Page 205 and 206: (2001). The correlation table begin
Page 207 and 208: Discussion and Implications Note. S
Page 209 and 210: will become important to identify i
Page 211 and 212: Parker, A. (2007). SMS - Its use in
Page 213 and 214: Find the perimeter of the rectangle
Page 215 and 216: Wait Time Management Issues related
Page 217 and 218: Precision Reduced_Precision ( T T0
Page 219 and 220: learning concept. If the Specialty
Page 221 and 222: Two criteria have been adopted to e
Page 223 and 224: Reduced Recall 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04
Page 225 and 226: In this work, both recall-oriented
Page 227 and 228: Tsai, C.-C., Chuang, S.-C., Liang,
Page 229 and 230: confidence and self-belief in their
Page 231 and 232: Peng et al. (2006) To explore ISE &
Page 233: Torkzadeh, Chang, and Demirhan (200
Page 237 and 238: Internet-based learning self-effica
Page 239 and 240: Though Lee and Lee (2008) did not d
Page 241 and 242: Regarding the category of ISE resea
Page 243 and 244: Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy:
Page 245 and 246: Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V.
Page 247 and 248: In formal learning, Safran, Helic,
Page 249 and 250: that culture is essential when user
Page 251 and 252: Table 3. Analysis of usage frequenc
Page 253 and 254: 7 1.16 137.73 0.25 0.29 0.25 Social
Page 255 and 256: discussions freely. So Korean stude
Page 257 and 258: Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R
Page 259 and 260: Figure 1. The UE Faculty Web Portal
Page 261 and 262: 2006), and consistency (Sindhuja &
Page 263 and 264: Independent Variables Dependent Var
Page 265 and 266: Meanwhile, as shown in Table 4, Ava
Page 267 and 268: design methods in the development o
Page 269 and 270: Pearson, J. M., & Pearson, A. (2008
Page 271 and 272: Clewley, N., Chen, S. Y., & Liu, X.
Page 273 and 274: As shown in this Table, Holists wil
Page 275 and 276: satisfaction or dissatisfaction wit
Page 277 and 278: 8 I would prefer to learn from huma
Page 279 and 280: the examples need to be more practi
Page 281 and 282: Brotherton, J. A,. & Abowd, G. D. (
Page 283 and 284: Cobos, D. L. (2011). Book review: T
show all

October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?