Title: Arial, 14 pt - School of Business and Economics - Maastricht ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1 Comparison of course usefulness per item M SD M SD difference AS The instructions for making the final test were clear 4.05 .75 3.79 .71 .073† AS The Weekly tests (intermediate tests) in this Summer/Wintercourse gave me a good picture of what I still had to 3.78 .79 3.96 .62 AS The internet application used for the tests was easy to work with 4.15 .83 3.88 .94 AS I have made … … . Weekly (intermediate) tests 2.81 .97 2.60 1.35 CD The contents of the Summer/Wintercourse were inspiring 4.15 .61 3.94 .56 .063† CD The format of the Summer/Wintercourse was good 4.15 .69 4.04 .77 CD The Summer/Wintercourse was well organized 4.10 .64 4.17 .72 CD I think I was motivated to finish this Summer/Wintercourse because I could work in my own pace 3.68 .94 3.83 .86 CD It is good that I could attend this Summer/Wintercourse independently (without interference from others) 4.37 .61 3.92 .87 .02* CD/2 Give an overall grade for the quality of the Summer/Wintercourse (1 = very bad - 10 = very good) 8.46 1.02 7.73 1.33 .01** CM The quality of the digital material was good 4.44 .60 3.96 .85 .01** CM The digital material motivated me to keep up with the subject matter 3.63 .81 3.54 .90 CM Learning with an E-book is not different from learning from a hard-copy book 2.78 .89 2.85 .99 GC The group in which I participated functioned well 3.86 .86 3.56 .90 .079† GC It was fun to collaborate with others in this Summer/Wintercourse 4.07 .85 3.71 .94 .041* GC Collaborating with others facilitated my understanding of the subject matter 3.78 .72 3.65 .79 GC I think I learned more in this Summer/Wintercourse through collaboration with others than I would have 3.34 .96 3.25 1.12 GC I learned participated if I had actively to work in individually the online group discussions 3.19 1.15 3.25 1.10 GT The goals of the Summer/Wintercourse were clear to me 4.00 .72 4.17 .63 GT It was clear to me what was expected of me this Summer/Wintercourse 3.85 .87 4.04 .71 GT The assigments/tasks stimulated me to collaborate with the other group 3.53 .86 3.50 .92 GT The assignments/tasks stimulated me to study 3.78 .85 3.69 .80 IN I was given the support that I needed 4.03 .69 4.23 .66 IN The Online Summercourse-team was enthousiastic in coaching our group 4.22 .72 4.54 .58 .014* IN The Online Summercourse team stimulated participation of all group members in the online group discussions 3.54 .86 3.88 .70 .033* IN The Online Summercourse team helped us to apply what we had learned on other situations than those 3.63 .61 3.94 .91 .038* IN/2 Give mentioned an overall in the grade assignments/tasks for the functioning of the Summer/Wintercourse team (1 = very bad - 10 = very good) 8.20 .94 7.98 1.42 LS This Summer/Wintercourse offered me a lot 4.27 .64 4.02 .53 .031* LS It was fun that I could attend this Summer/Wintercourse via the internet 4.22 .74 4.06 .81 LS I am satisfied with what I learned in terms of knowledge. skills and insight 3.81 .78 3.69 .88 LS I gained enough knowledge and skills in economics to start with my study in Maastricht 3.68 .71 3.73 .79 LS I think that by attending this Summer/Wintercourse I will get better results in my future study in Maastricht 3.85 .71 3.77 .93 VC The use of the webvideoconference system (Breeze) was useful . . 3.79 .87 VC I learned a lot from the discussions in the web videoconferences (Breeze) . . 3.48 .92 VC The use of the discussion forums (SURF-groepen) was useful . . 3.90 .93 VC I learned a lot from the discussions in the discussion forums . . 3.27 1.01 VC There were too many webvideoconferences in this summer/winter course . . 2.67 .86 Weekly I have spent … . hours on this course 13.43 6.76 11.12 5.54 .069† Independent sample T-test (2-sided) of Discussion forum (n=59) vs. Videoconference and Discussion forum (n=49). **Coefficient is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed). *Coefficient is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). † Coefficient is significant at the .10 level (2-tailed). AS=Assessment. CD=Course Design. CM= Course Material. GC=Group Collaboration. GT=Goals and Tasks. IN=Instruction. LS=Learning Satisfaction VC= Videoconference Discussion Forum Videoconference In Table 2, the effects of the redesign on perceived usefulness of the course per category is listed. In contrast to our expectations, students in cohort 2 were less satisfied with the course materials. With respect to the course design, cohort 2 students differ from cohort 1 students but the effect is in the opposite direction to what we expected. In other words, cohort 1 students were more satisfied about the course design than cohort 2 students. No effect has been found with respect to goals and tasks and group collaboration. We found an improved satisfaction of the role of the teacher in cohort 2 at a 5% significance level with a moderate t-test
size effect (F = .057, t = 2.549, p = .012, d = .50). However, we did not find any difference among the cohorts with respect to learning satisfaction. Overall, we have to conclude that students who used web-videoconferencing in addition to discussion forums were not more positive about the online course than students who only used the discussion forums. Table 2 Perceived course usefulness per category t-test Cohen M SD M SD difference d-value Assessment 14.80 2.41 14.23 2.60 Course Materials 11.29 1.66 10.65 1.80 .058† .37 Course Design 24.69 2.59 23.76 2.48 .064† .36 Group Collaboration 18.24 3.34 17.42 3.28 Goals and Tasks 15.15 2.51 15.40 1.82 Instruction 19.53 2.13 20.57 2.09 .012* -.50 Learning Satisfaction 19.83 2.50 19.27 2.73 Independent sample T-test (2-sided) of Discussion forum (n=59) vs. Videoconference and Discussion forum (n=49). *Coefficient is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). † Coefficient is significant at the .10 level (2-tailed). Discussion Discussion Forum Videoconference Based on the idea that better opportunities to establish communication and to express emotion contributes to social presence, we expected that using web-videoconferences would positively influence perceptions of course design, goals and tasks, group collaboration, instruction and finally learning satisfaction among learners. In other words, we expected that groups working together using (synchronous) web-videoconferences in combination with (asynchronous) discussion forums would be more positive about the course’s usefulness than groups who worked together solely using discussion forums. However, the results indicate that students using videoconference were in general not more positive about the online course with the exception of their perception of teacher instruction. The fact that students in cohort 2 (web-videoconferencing) were less positive about the course materials might have different explanations. In cohort 2 a new version of the E- book system was used, which seemed to be less compatible with Apple-users. In fact, six
Page 1 and 2: Social presence, web-videoconferenc
Page 3 and 4: Figure 1. an example of asynchronou
Page 5 and 6: e a successful tool of collaborativ
Page 7 and 8: Therefore, measurements of learning
Page 9 and 10: contextual motivation for education
Page 11: egulation (F = 5.633, t = 2.409, p
Page 15 and 16: social presence using web-videoconf
Page 17 and 18: References Anderson, T., Rourke, L.

Title: Arial, 14 pt - School of Business and Economics - Maastricht ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?