Download - Educational Technology & Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

without Internet connection. However, authors with client-based authoring tools usually have to manage the duplicate learning resources both at local host and on LMS, and the external learning material support is also relative weak due to its lack of good integration with LORs (Learning Object Repository) or external (multimedia) backend databases. Opposite to the client-based authoring tool, the web-based authoring tools are usually implemented as a portion or function of entire LMS or LOR. Suchlike integral design allows authoring tool to directly upload its production to databases and also to make links between present design and existing learning resources. Moreover, thanks to advances of Internet and Web 2.0 technologies, web-based authoring tools provide friendlier user interface than before, however some sophisticated functions such like real-time recording are still difficult to implement. The major weakness of web-based authoring tool is that the requisite of Internet accessing. With that, two problems are derived. One is teachers cannot do authoring without Internet connection, and the other is the authoring process would be interrupted by an accidental Internet disconnection. Especially for the latter problem, the tool should provide recovery function to avoid data and status losing. The MEAT is a kind of the client-based authoring tool. While designing the MEAT, we believed that a decent tool must be platform-independent, giving more design flexibility and reliability when teachers authoring with it. Case study: Nurse education The MEAT was introduced to facilitate teachers who do not have computer science background to create learning contents and test items with both web and mobile based settings. To reveal the usability of the MEAT, in this subsection we introduce the case study of online nurse education in National Cheng Kung University Hospital (NCKUH). Since the nurses in NCKUH work with the three-shift workday system, the regular training course is not applicable to this case. However, the nurse training programs and assessment are necessary in hospital, and the assessment result is one of the important criteria of promotion. In this situation, Nurse Department recorded all lectures as VCDs as the asynchronous learning contents for nurses who cannot attend at regular classes. In addition, the Nurse Department has to arrange a proper time to perform nurse assessment. In particular, it is quite difficult to practice assessments since nurses who took the same course may not have the same available time to participate in the examination event. Until two years ago, the Nurse Department of NCKUH decided to choose e-learning as the solution to train and assess nurses. The selected LMS is ANTS (Agent-based navigational training system), which was developed by Jeng et al. (2005), and the MEAT was chosen by Nurse Department as the authoring tool. In the training program, each nurse can choose the courses she needs, and then she can obtain the certifications from Nurse Department if she passed the online assessments. In the nurse training site, all contents and test items are provided by instructors and produced by MEAT. Until now, there are 19 courses and 483 test items available on the ANTS for nurse education. To reveal the usability of the MEAT, we have surveyed 13 instructors and 583 nurses (students) involved in the training program by questionnaires. Table 2 shows the surveyed results from the instructors. All instructors thought they can easily find out the wanted functions without strenuous training and manual by their side. 61.5% of the instructors believed that synchronization function is easy to manipulate. However, some instructors indicated that there are too many controllable components on the synchronization panel, which let the instructors who first engaged in authoring feel disoriented and fall into the difficulty of information overload (Eppler & Mengis, 2004). All instructors appreciated the summarization of complex SCORM standard and agreed that it is easy to operate the authoring tool through the step-by-step authoring process. In terms of the produced learning contents, teachers thought the web-based contents are better than the mobile-based contents. Nevertheless, they appreciate that the MEAT can produce the acceptable mobile-based contents without paying extra efforts and the productions can be learnt by students in mobile manner. More than half teachers (53.85%) thought the Test Item Design Tool is easy to manipulate. However, some teachers indicated that after several times of engagement, they finally understood the tool can produce different types of test items at a time. We believe there are two reasons to cause this situation: 1) the lack of hints on the test item switch panel and 2) teachers do not need (frequent) switch panel among functions since teachers usually design the same type of test items at a time. Based on the evaluation result of test item, most teachers thought the web-based one is satisfactory (61.55%) but they did not agree that the overall condition of the mobile assessment is good enough for assessing nurses. According to the instructors’ opinions, they mentioned that they worried about that the instable mobile network may interrupt the assessment progress and the delayed transmission of test items may harm students’ interests. Nevertheless, in terms of rehearsal, instructors still approved 63
the convenience of mobile-based assessment and they encouraged us to pay more efforts to complete the insufficient parts. In our survey, all instructors did not use the Learning Map Design Tool in their teaching and therefore they cannot judge the academic value in either manipulation or production of Learning Map Design Tool. Their opinions revealed that they did not know what Learning Map Design Tool is and they thought it is not necessary to know when engaging in distance instruction. Finally, even though there is no instructor familiar with all functions of the MEAT, instructors still approved that the MEAT is easy to manipulate and has helpful advantages in e-learning resource production. Table 2: Results of the survey questionnaire from instructors # Question Very Approvable Neutral Opposing Very Avg. approvable opposing 1 You can find out correct 2 11 0 0 0 4.15 authoring function without hard practice and manual help. 15.4% 84.6% 0% 0% 0% 2 The engagement of learning 1 7 3 2 0 3.54 content synchronization is easy. 7.7% 53.8% 23.1% 15.4% 0% 3 Comparing to complete SCORM 6 7 0 0 0 4.46 metadata, you prefer to fill in summarized SCORM metadata. 46.2% 53.8% 0% 0% 0% 4 The step-by-step learning content 1 12 0 0 0 4.08 production process is smooth and easy to follow. 7.7% 92.3% 0% 0% 0% 5 The presentation of produced 5 8 0 0 0 4.38 web-based learning content is satisfactory. 38.5% 61.5% 0% 0% 0% 7 The presentation of produced 0 10 3 0 0 3.77 mobile-based learning content is satisfactory. 0% 76.9% 23.1% 0% 0% 8 The Test Item Design Tool is easy 1 6 5 1 0 3.54 to manipulate. 7.7% 46.15% 38.45% 7.7% 9 The presentation of produced 3 5 5 0 0 3.85 web-based test item is satisfactory. 23.1% 38.45% 38.45% 0% 0% 10 The presentation of produced 0 1 1 7 4 1.92 mobile-based test item is satisfactory. 0% 7.7% 7.7% 53.8% 30.8% 11 The Learning Map Design Tool is 0 0 13 0 0 3 easy to manipulate. 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 12 The production of Learning Map 0 0 13 0 0 3 Design Tool is beneficial to students. 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 13 From overall point of view, you 4 9 0 0 0 4.31 think that the MEAT is easy to manipulate. 30.8% 69.2% 0% 0% 0% 14 From overall point of view, you 5 8 0 0 0 4.38 think that the MEAT can help you with producing learning resources. 38.5% 61.5% 0% 0% 0% Table 3 shows the survey results from nurses with regard to the satisfaction of the system. According to the result, most nurses (about 87.23%) approved that the presentation and manipulation of web-based learning and assessment were satisfactory. However, only small portion of nurses (about 6.7%) knew the existence of mobile-based learning site. Based on the small portion of nurses’ opinions, they mentioned that either to browse online learning contents or to engage in online assessment with mobile setting was too expensive even though it is convenient. From overall 64
Page 1 and 2:
April 2009 Volume 12 Number 2
Page 3 and 4:
Abstracting and Indexing Educationa
Page 5 and 6:
Engaging students in multimedia-med
Page 7 and 8:
this study discusses computer-based
Page 9 and 10:
Sampling for preliminary study One
Page 11 and 12:
Part 2 Pearson correlation .349** 1
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1. Box and whisker plot of t
Page 15 and 16:
characteristics and learning styles
Page 17 and 18: However, critical reflection and in
Page 19 and 20: novels, so they collected any relat
Page 21 and 22: 1. Theories of teaching: Comments m
Page 23 and 24: grammatical errors and basic writin
Page 25 and 26: Ho, B., & Richards, J. C. (1993). R
Page 27 and 28: Hwang, K.-A., & Yang, C.-H. (2009).
Page 29 and 30: e deduced from the Affective Domain
Page 31 and 32: Detection procedure Figure 1 shows
Page 33 and 34: avoided. Image processing is perfor
Page 35 and 36: falling asleep) as defined in this
Page 37 and 38: classmates or left their seats duri
Page 39 and 40: help teachers to recognize the lear
Page 41 and 42: Hsieh, P.-H., & Dwyer, F. (2009). T
Page 43 and 44: significant comprehension effects o
Page 45 and 46: Treatment 3 (keyword group): Studen
Page 47 and 48: Criteria of achievement measures Th
Page 49 and 50: esults. A correlational analysis de
Page 51 and 52: A 2 x 1 ANOVA analyzed the effect o
Page 53 and 54: References Aragon, S. R. (2004). In
Page 55 and 56: Raphael, T. (1982). Improving quest
Page 57 and 58: educing maintenance costs. The cont
Page 59 and 60: Synchronization functions According
Page 61 and 62: inconsistency) and navigate directl
Page 63 and 64: the suitability of the instructiona
Page 65 and 66: Design of manipulation process The
Page 67: Table 1: Comparative analysis of au
Page 71 and 72: According to evaluation result, the
Page 73 and 74: Tan, O. S., Parsons, R. D., Hinson,
Page 75 and 76: At a deeper level, though, there wa
Page 77 and 78: theoretical assumptions. Two theore
Page 79 and 80: The students were not going to have
Page 81 and 82: slightly different. The group who c
Page 83 and 84: every item, not giving any result.
Page 85 and 86: edited and presented to the class u
Page 87 and 88: Figure 10. Screen captures from the
Page 89 and 90: Some of the concerns that emerge fr
Page 91 and 92: Ajayi, L. (2009). An Exploration of
Page 93 and 94: As a result of the confluence of di
Page 95 and 96: peers (Schellens et al. 2005). Sche
Page 97 and 98: The integration of discussion board
Page 99 and 100: ecause the technology allowed the p
Page 101 and 102: The pre-service teachers perceived
Page 103 and 104: Furthermore, the study demonstrated
Page 105 and 106: Schellens, T., van Keer, H., & Valc
Page 107 and 108: McKean, 2003). Instructors will see
Page 109 and 110: program at The Ohio State Universit
Page 111 and 112: Knowledge and skills of developing
Page 113 and 114: their monthly reflections or assign
Page 115 and 116: Bull, K., Montgomery, D., Overton,
Page 117 and 118: frustrating the student). ITSs make
Page 119 and 120:
• Link removal - advanced student
Page 121 and 122:
Expert Module Expert Module’s mai
Page 123 and 124:
Based on the questionnaire results
Page 125 and 126:
students were told that their perfo
Page 127 and 128:
thirds of the interviewed students
Page 129 and 130:
Throughout the semester, students i
Page 131 and 132:
human teacher or question developer
Page 133 and 134:
To test the learning effectiveness
Page 135 and 136:
APPENDIX A Computer Science and Sof
Page 137 and 138:
Thus, the use of computers changes
Page 139 and 140:
Specifically, two objectives were p
Page 141 and 142:
Nonetheless, both teachers assign a
Page 143 and 144:
48% 35% 53% similar similar 69% 42%
Page 145 and 146:
Table 4: Students’ attitudes Stat
Page 147 and 148:
activities. Specifically, the histo
Page 149 and 150:
Huang, Y.-M., Huang, T.-C., Wang, K
Page 151 and 152:
• Could recommended learning sequ
Page 153 and 154:
Analysis of sequences prediction me
Page 155 and 156:
Figure 4. The sorting of learning s
Page 157 and 158:
The figures 5a and 5b illustrate th
Page 159 and 160:
Learning sequence recommendation sy
Page 161 and 162:
In this study, forty subjects were
Page 163 and 164:
The potential for LSRS to promote l
Page 165 and 166:
They pointed out that LSRS helped t
Page 167 and 168:
Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (1991
Page 169 and 170:
Related Efforts An Internet forum i
Page 171 and 172:
with handheld devices and they were
Page 173 and 174:
agent would direct learners to a le
Page 175 and 176:
Mobile RSS Aggregator In order to s
Page 177 and 178:
learning, such as posting question
Page 179 and 180:
With novel technological support, m
Page 181 and 182:
Shen, L., Wang, M., & Shen, R. (200
Page 183 and 184:
as an ‘affective loop’, which r
Page 185 and 186:
Figure 2 is an example of two-dimen
Page 187 and 188:
preference was gathered through dat
Page 189 and 190:
compute the heart rate (HR) as a fu
Page 191 and 192:
sessions. Of all the 18 learning se
Page 193 and 194:
Burleson, W., Picard, R. W., Perlin
Page 195 and 196:
Wu, C.-C., & Lai, C.Y. (2009). Wire
Page 197 and 198:
The wireless handheld learning envi
Page 199 and 200:
the lengthiness of the scales, whic
Page 201 and 202:
Nursing dictionary We constructed a
Page 203 and 204:
them. The computers were networked
Page 205 and 206:
“The major difference was that I
Page 207 and 208:
questionnaire. We do not consider t
Page 209 and 210:
Faruque, F., Hewlett, P. O., Wyatt,
Page 211 and 212:
etween a user and the system. Addit
Page 213 and 214:
Figure 2. A concept map representin
Page 215 and 216:
C5.0 can help teachers to generate
Page 217 and 218:
that a selected programming exercis
Page 219 and 220:
differences between our system and
Page 221 and 222:
1(students can complete without any
Page 223 and 224:
The PADS sometimes assigned very di
Page 225 and 226:
Corno, L. (2000). Looking at Homewo
Page 227 and 228:
Hwang, W.-Y., Hsu, J.-L., Tretiakov
Page 229 and 230:
listed these functions as allowing
Page 231 and 232:
In the research presented in this a
Page 233 and 234:
Research Tools Web-based learning e
Page 235 and 236:
Table 1. Operational definitions of
Page 237 and 238:
action, interaction, and outeractio
Page 239 and 240:
for them was getting the answer as
Page 241 and 242:
Table 6 shows the learners’ prefe
Page 243 and 244:
Bell, P., & Winn, W. (2000). Distri
Page 245 and 246:
Askar, P., & Altun, A. (2009). CogS
Page 247 and 248:
elations, interactions and activiti
Page 249 and 250:
Figure 3. A comparison of knowledge
Page 251 and 252:
ontology will easily be extensible
Page 253 and 254:
Figure 7. Visual Representation of
Page 255 and 256:
Step 5: Use Boolean to combine the
Page 257 and 258:
2) CogSkillNet provides classroom i
Page 259 and 260:
Neo, M., & Neo, T.-K. (2009). Engag
Page 261 and 262:
• Conversation and collaboration
Page 263 and 264:
IMAGE 2 2. Problem identification I
Page 265 and 266:
Methodology At the end of the proje
Page 267 and 268:
presentation skills (m = 3.72), and
Page 269 and 270:
6. Can’t be denying that, sometim
Page 271 and 272:
Lambert, N. M., & McCombs, B. J. (1
Page 273 and 274:
not detected in a previous study, t
Page 275 and 276:
et al. (2001) studied the learning
Page 277 and 278:
all the students. At the midpoint o
Page 279 and 280:
The observed pairs were aware of be
Page 281 and 282:
Table 2 shows the results from a mo
Page 283 and 284:
Table 5: The distribution of time (
Page 285 and 286:
As discussed in the section on prev
Page 287 and 288:
McDowell, C., Werner, L., Bullock,
Page 289 and 290:
Comprehension monitoring is the awa
Page 291 and 292:
or roles in a context, such as “I
Page 293 and 294:
Correlation coefficient was also co
Page 295 and 296:
(a) Text 1 (b) Text 2 (c) Text 3 (d
Page 297 and 298:
Table 3 shows that the average read
Page 299 and 300:
Figure 10. Trace results of the les
Page 301 and 302:
monitor their reading process and h
Page 303 and 304:
Conn, S. R., Roberts, R. L., & Powe
Page 305 and 306:
The technology-mediated groups, wit
Page 307 and 308:
hybrid model of supervision was pos
Page 309 and 310:
Our research indicates that the hyb
Page 311 and 312:
Janoff, D. S., & Schoenholtz-Read,
Page 313 and 314:
goal of using storyboards. But, thi
Page 315 and 316:
In general, learning activities nee
Page 317 and 318:
Furthermore, free subjects, such as
Page 319 and 320:
Storyboarding Roots and related wor
Page 321 and 322:
Referees, on the other hand, may wa
Page 323 and 324:
Symbols Interpretation Defines a un
Page 325 and 326:
Figure 4. Top-level storyboard for
Page 327 and 328:
may take subjects such as practical
Page 329 and 330:
network security information envir
Page 331 and 332:
The concrete procedure and interact
Page 333 and 334:
(e.g., for graduation) using such i
Page 335 and 336:
Thus, academic education modeling b
Page 337 and 338:
Feyer, T., Kao, O., Schewe, K.-D.,
Page 339 and 340:
Richards, G. (2009). Book review: T
Page 341 and 342:
expands the child’s proximal envi
Page 343:
Chapter 6 exemplifies the activitie
show all

Download - Educational Technology & Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?