Forging new pathways of research and innovation in open and distance learning

Recommendations

Info

The Usability Evaluation of UniCampus – The Romanian MOOC Diana Andone et al. instruction need to be used and students need to be fully encouraged to discover and develop skills for online and lifelong learning, also by eliminating the confusion with distance, blended, open education, as we believe this is just 21 st century learning. References 1. Andone, D., Dron, J., & Pemberton, L. (2009). Developing a Desirable Learning Environment for Digital Students. Technology, Instruction, Cognition & Learning, 6(4). 2. Bruff, D. (April 5, 2013). Who are our students? Bringing local and global learning communities [Blog post]. Agile Learning. Retrieved October 1, 2015, from http://derekbruff.org/?p=2558 3. Ghadiri, K., Qayoumi, M. H., Junn, E., Hsu, P., & Sujitparapitaya, S. (2013). The transformative potential of blended learning using MIT edX’s 6.002 x online MOOC content combined with student team-based learning in class. EdX Environment, 8, 14. 4. Holotescu, C., Grosseck, G., Cretu, V., & Naaji, A. (2014). Integrating MOOCs in Blended Courses. Paper presented at the 10 th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, Romania, ISSN 2066 - 026X, 2014. 5. Jansen, D. (2016). MOOCs in Europe. EADTU. Retrieved from http://eadtu.eu/images/publicaties/MOOCs_in_Europe_November_2015.pdf 6. Open Education Week (2015). Open Education Week, Retrieved November 14, 2015, from http://www.openeducationweek.org 7. Siemens, G., & Downes, S., (2008). MOOC Course: Connectivism and Connective Knowledge. 28 June 2008. [Online]. Available: https://web.archive.org/web/20080629220943/http://ltc.umanitoba.ca:83/connectivism/ 8. Sharples, M., Jeffery, N., du Boulay, J., Teather, D., Teather, B., & du Boulay, G. (2002). Socio-cognitive engineering: a methodology for the design of human-centred technology. European Journal of Operational Research, 136(2), 310–323. 9. Ternauciuc, A., & Mihăescu, V. (2014). Use of Social Media in MOOC – integration with the Moodle LCMS. Proceedings of the 6 th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education 2014. 10. Vasiu, R., & Andone, D. (2014). OERs and MOOCs—The Romanian experience. Proceedings of Web and Open Access to Learning (ICWOAL), 2014 International Conference, 1-5. IEEE. 86 Reaching from the roots – 9 th EDEN Research Workshop Proceedings, 2016, Oldenburg ISBN 978-615-5511-12-7
Forging new pathways of research and innovation in open and distance learning: Reaching from the roots Proceedings of the 9 th European Distance and E-Learning Network Research Workshop, 2016 Oldenburg, 4-6 October, 2016 ISBN 978-615-5511-12-7 CONNECTING IN THE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: STUDENT PREFERENCES FOR COMMUNICATION WITH FACULTY Jill Buban, Online Learning Consortium, United States of America Summary Whether it be in the online or blended modality, learning and teaching in these formats includes a heightened use of technology. The focus of this paper is a study that examined undergraduate adult students’ experiences in academic faculty mentoring relationships that use technology for communication. Through an exploratory mixed methods study, a questionnaire of 273 students and six case studies revealed students’ preferences for technology use and their preferences for communication with their faculty mentors. The findings provide insight into how students, faculty, and administrators can begin a conversation about best practices for student-faculty communication in the online environment. Introduction Communication between the faculty mentor and student is an important variable related to persistence among learners in both traditional and virtual environments (Stein & Glazer, 2003). A benchmarking study, Best Practices in Adult Learning (Council for Adult and Experiential Learning – CAEL, 1999), found that communication is a top priority in adult learning focused institutions and is instrumental in meeting the needs of adult learners. Oneto-one communication, as demonstrated by the academic mentoring model, is crucial to adult learners’ successes. This type of communication is evident in student-staff communication, student-faculty communication, and student-peer communication (1999; p.44). In examining undergraduate adult students’ experiences using online technology for communication with their faculty mentors, the study explored how factors such as students’ age, gender, and culture impacts their preference for a form of technology with which to communicate with a faculty mentor. Background A 2008 study (Jones, Johnson-Yale, Millermaier, & Perez, 2008) assessed U.S. college students’ Internet use for academic work, and explored how the Internet has affected both their academic and social lives. The researchers’ literature review identified advantages of Internet use for student-professor interactions including speed, the ability to record correspondence, and to communicate asynchronously; the disadvantages include misinterpretation of email messages and excessive quantity of email messages, which can be time consuming for faculty 87
Page 1 and 2:
9 th EDEN Research Workshop Forging
Page 3 and 4:
Introduction Distance education is
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS ADVANCED DISTANCE
Page 7 and 8:
LEARNING ANALYTICS Scaling Learning
Page 9 and 10:
Forging new pathways of research an
Page 11 and 12:
Towards a Framework for Virtual Int
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Towards Designing an Oxford Experie
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Emergent Evaluation: An Initial Exp
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
A MOOC with a Difference: Creating
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44: Use of MOOCs in Traditional Classro
Page 53 and 54: Head Start Online: A MOOC for those
Page 63 and 64: Carrots and Sticks: Workload and Pe
Page 75 and 76: Online Learning in Community Colleg
Page 83 and 84: Forging new pathways of research an
Page 85 and 86: The Usability Evaluation of UniCamp
Page 93: The Usability Evaluation of UniCamp
Page 97 and 98: Connecting in the Online Environmen
Page 105 and 106: Contextualising Learner Experience:
Page 109 and 110: Investigating the Effectiveness of
Page 119 and 120: WhatsApp: “Going where the Conver
Page 127 and 128: A Study of the Use of Ubiquitous Mo
Page 137 and 138: Differentiated Technology-Based Int
Page 145 and 146:
Differentiated Technology-Based Int
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Using Digital Technologies for Incl
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Video in Higher Education: Examinin
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Policy Review of Open Badges for Op
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Open Educational Resources (OER): G
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Monitoring Progress on Open Educati
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
A Programmatic Approach to Blended
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Teaching Science through Technology
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Contributions to Teaching Practice
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
The Irish Online Learning Landscape
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
The State of Distance Education in
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Scaling Learning Analytics: The Pra
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Integration of Learning Analytics i
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Learning Reprioritised: Supporting
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Personal Learning Environments: Mov
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Learning Analytics in Distance Educ
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Credit, Trust and Open Education Ka
Page 329 and 330:
Credit, Trust and Open Education Ka
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Supporting the Capacity Development
Page 335 and 336:
Supporting the Capacity Development
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
The Role of Learning Design and Lea
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Changing Landscape of the Lifelong
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
eLene4work - Developing a Framework
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Collection of "Synergy" Synopses 35
Page 363 and 364:
I-LINC The stakeholders’ platform
Page 365 and 366:
EuroDuaLE European cooperative fram
Page 367 and 368:
t-MAIL Teacher Mobile Application f
Page 369 and 370:
eLene4work Learning to learn for ne
Page 371 and 372:
ARMAZEG Developing Tools for Lifelo
Page 373 and 374:
LeHo Learning at Home and the Hospi
Page 375 and 376:
SeaL Seamless Learning in Lake Cons
show all

Forging new pathways of research and innovation in open and distance learning

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?