Views
2 months ago

Advances in E-learning-Experiences and Methodologies

Telematic Environments

Telematic Environments and Competition-Based Methodologies example, Mehlenbacher, Miller, Covington, and Larsen (2000) classify students according to the categorization of learning styles developed by Felder. They distinguish active from reflective students, visual from verbal students, sensing from intuitive students, and sequential from global students. Active students prefer to process information through engagement in physical activity, discussion, and in groups, whereas reflective students tend to work alone. Visual students base their work on pictures and graphics, whereas verbal students prefer written and spoken words. Sensing students tend to work with visual and sound aids, whereas intuitive students prefer memories and ideas. Finally, sequential students like doing logical incremental steps, whereas global students prefer total picture reasoning. In another line, Kim and Sonnenwald (2002) use the scale of learning preferences of Owens and Barnes to identify three learning styles: cooperative, competitive, and individualized. The cooperative learning style indicates a preference for achieving individual goals while working in group. The competitive learning style indicates a preference for learning in competition with others, often achieving individual goals. Lastly, the individualized learning style indicates a preference for achieving individual goals having no involvement with other students. Finally, some authors briefly modify traditional learning styles models in order to adapt them to new technology based systems. For example, Brown, Cristea, Stewart, and Brailsford (2005) extend the Curry’s “onion” model for adaptive hypermedia systems. They integrate prior knowledge layer as an additional layer to those included in the “onion” model: instructional preference, social interaction, information processing style, prior knowledge, and personality style. The innermost layer, cognitive processing style, seeks to measure an individual’s personality, specifically related to how they prefer to acquire and integrate information. Moving outwards, the next layer measures information processing style and examines a learner’s intellectual approach to assimilation of new information. The layer beyond examines social interaction and how students prefer to interact with each other. The outermost layer, of instructional preference, tends to relate to external factors such as physiological and environmental stimuli associated with learning activities. The outermost layers are more influenced by external factors (and more observable) whereas the innermost layers are considered to be more stable psychological constructs and less susceptible to change; however these are much less easily measured. Traditional learning methodologies have been oriented for reflective students and individualized learning. Nowadays, there is a greater interest in applying learning methods suitable for different learning styles. In this sense, the multiple possibilities that ICT offers allow us to adapt the used methodologies to a bigger range of learning styles. Ict-BAsed ActIve LeArnIng There are different types of telematic tools and educational material. Most of them are currently based on Web and data base technologies: • Tools for the management of courses and students: enrolment, student’s data record, student’s achievement record, and so forth. • Tools for online lectures: slides, videos, videoconferences, electronic blackboards, and so forth. • Material for the support to the classes: exercises, self-assessments, interactive tutorials, virtual encyclopaedias, multimedia books, hypertext references, and so forth. • Virtual laboratories: animations, simulations, study cases, and so forth. • Communication tools: electronic mail, chat, discussion forums, instant messages ser-

Telematic Environments and Competition-Based Methodologies vice, queries boxes, distribution lists, news boards, news groups, multiconferences, and so forth. • Tools for collaborative learning: coordination of group work, virtual spaces for sharing information and resources, management of document versions, and so forth. Nowadays, these tools are not used alone but integrated into learning management systems (LMS), which permits the scheduling, implementation, and management of the whole learning process. Most of the current available LMS platforms (WebCT, Blackboard, Angel, Centra, Moodle, Claroline, and so forth) include many of those common tools. They are used in different active learning contexts, since they facilitate the interactions between the teacher and the student, among students and between the student and the course material. These interactions are very important components of active learning (Mehlenbacher et al., 2000). As well as management, communication, and interaction tools, interactive contents, such as online interactive exercises, can be very efficient when used as instruments for active learning. In fact, whereas most of the available e-learning material consists of static hypertext pages, at best with Flash animations, the current learning theory suggests that the student’s achievement improves more when the educational resources are more interactive and multimedia (Morozov, Tanakov, Gerasimov, Bystrov, & Cvirco, 2004). However, it has to be taken into account that interactivity is a critical design objective of the educational Web sites, since it requires a hardworking process. Whereas to develop static or quasi-static hypertext pages is cheap and easy, the design and implementation of interactive material takes a lot of time and is a complex and expensive task. Active methodologies based on the use of ICT promote active learning and permit cooperative activities. This fact has generated a lot of experiences in what has been called computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL), many times as the opposite of traditional competitive learning. However, in our opinion, there is not opposition between collaboration and competition since both techniques can be used in a complementary way. Team competition could be a good example of it. coLLABorAtIve And comPetItIve LeArnIng Collaborative work or group work is the work that a group of people do with the aim of getting a common objective. Researches in group techniques suggest that group work improves the way of perceiving obstacles and determines the group as an element of support and motivation to face up to learning (Fandos & González, 2005). Although sometimes it is used as synonym of collaborative learning, cooperative learning puts the emphasis more on the product that is obtained during the group learning process. Besides, the scheduling and guidance of the teacher has a more important role. However, in spite of that slight nuance of meaning, both types of learning are different to the traditional one in the same things (Marqués, 2001): • They centre on the student. • There is an intrinsic motivation. • They are focused on knowledge-building. • The responsibility of the learning falls especially on the student. • There is a greater motivation. • The development of higher-order reasoning is promoted. • More abilities are developed, research, group work, problem solving, public presentations, social abilities, prevention and mediation in conflicts, and so forth.

  • Page 2 and 3:

    Advances in E-Learning: Experiences

  • Page 4 and 5:

    Table of Contents Preface .........

  • Page 6 and 7:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 8 and 9:

    Chapter III Philosophical and Epist

  • Page 10 and 11:

    of constructive and cooperative met

  • Page 12 and 13:

    Chapter XIV Open Source LMS Customi

  • Page 14 and 15:

    contents, learning contexts, proces

  • Page 16 and 17:

    xv these organizations do not get a

  • Page 18 and 19:

    xvii QuALIty In e-LeArnIng Before t

  • Page 20 and 21:

    allow that the teachers in training

  • Page 22 and 23:

    xxi ISO. (1986). Quality-Vocabulary

  • Page 24 and 25:

    Chapter I RAPAD: A Reflective and P

  • Page 26 and 27:

    RAPAD in fields such as law, engine

  • Page 28 and 29:

    RAPAD mystery to the new student. B

  • Page 30 and 31:

    RAPAD example, whereas Laurillard h

  • Page 32 and 33:

    RAPAD Ontologically, systems philos

  • Page 34 and 35:

    RAPAD information related processes

  • Page 36 and 37:

    RAPAD methods and techniques accord

  • Page 38 and 39:

    RAPAD 2. An introduction to learnin

  • Page 40 and 41:

    RAPAD then asked to reflect on and

  • Page 42 and 43:

    RAPAD Figure 4. A rich picture to h

  • Page 44 and 45:

    RAPAD Again using techniques from t

  • Page 46 and 47:

    RAPAD university preparation course

  • Page 48 and 49:

    RAPAD The third interface is at the

  • Page 50 and 51:

    RAPAD Knight, P.T., & Trowler, P. (

  • Page 52 and 53:

    RAPAD AddItIonAL reAdIngs Goodyear,

  • Page 54 and 55:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning t

  • Page 56 and 57:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning (

  • Page 58 and 59:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning s

  • Page 60 and 61:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning r

  • Page 62 and 63:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning o

  • Page 64 and 65:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning n

  • Page 66 and 67:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning M

  • Page 68 and 69:

    A Heideggerian View on E-Learning W

  • Page 70 and 71:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 72 and 73:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 74 and 75:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 76 and 77:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 78 and 79:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 80 and 81:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 82 and 83:

    Philisophical and Epistemological B

  • Page 84 and 85:

    Chapter IV E-Mentoring: An Extended

  • Page 86 and 87:

    E-Mentoring However, what is unders

  • Page 88 and 89:

    E-Mentoring baugh, & Williams, 2004

  • Page 90 and 91:

    E-Mentoring Table 2. Contact. Diffe

  • Page 92 and 93:

    E-Mentoring Table 10. Ethical impli

  • Page 94 and 95:

    E-Mentoring Table 15. Technology st

  • Page 96 and 97:

    E-Mentoring Table 21. Coaching. Bes

  • Page 98 and 99:

    E-Mentoring Table 27. Moment. Best

  • Page 100 and 101:

    E-Mentoring Moreover, existing rese

  • Page 102 and 103:

    E-Mentoring Kasprisin, C. A., Singl

  • Page 104 and 105:

    E-Mentoring Ensher, E. A., Heun, C.

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Chapter V Training Teachers for E-L

  • Page 108 and 109:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning FL

  • Page 110 and 111:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ne

  • Page 112 and 113:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning A

  • Page 114 and 115:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning yo

  • Page 116 and 117:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning Di

  • Page 118 and 119:

    Training Teachers for E-Learning ht

  • Page 120 and 121:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 122 and 123:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 124 and 125:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 126 and 127:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 128 and 129:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 130 and 131:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 132 and 133:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 134 and 135:

    The Role of Institutional Factors i

  • Page 136 and 137:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 138 and 139:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 140 and 141:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 142 and 143:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 144 and 145:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 146 and 147:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 148 and 149:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 150 and 151:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 152 and 153:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    E-Learning Value and Student Experi

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 158 and 159:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 160 and 161:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 162 and 163:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 164 and 165:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 168 and 169:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 170 and 171:

    Integrating Technology and Research

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Chapter IX AI Techniques for Monito

  • Page 174 and 175:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 176 and 177:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 178 and 179:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 180 and 181:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 182 and 183:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 184 and 185:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 186 and 187:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 188 and 189:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 190 and 191:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 192 and 193:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 194 and 195:

    AI Techniques for Monitoring Studen

  • Page 196 and 197:

    Chapter X Knowledge Discovery from

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 206 and 207:

    Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning

  • Page 208 and 209: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 210 and 211: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 212 and 213: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 214 and 215: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 216 and 217: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 218 and 219: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 220 and 221: Knowledge Discovery from E-Learning
  • Page 222 and 223: Chapter XI Swarm-Based Techniques i
  • Page 224 and 225: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 226 and 227: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 228 and 229: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 230 and 231: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 232 and 233: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 234 and 235: Swarm-Based Techniques in E-Learnin
  • Page 236 and 237: Chapter XII E-Learning 2.0: The Lea
  • Page 238 and 239: E-Learning 2.0 Table 1. Different s
  • Page 240 and 241: E-Learning 2.0 Figure 1. Difference
  • Page 242 and 243: E-Learning 2.0 where the blog is al
  • Page 244 and 245: E-Learning 2.0 process. Along this
  • Page 246 and 247: E-Learning 2.0 forth, and, of cours
  • Page 248 and 249: E-Learning 2.0 Finally, it is impor
  • Page 250 and 251: E-Learning 2.0 never be a hotchpotc
  • Page 252 and 253: E-Learning 2.0 McPherson, K. (2006)
  • Page 254 and 255: E-Learning 2.0 Rosen, A. (2006). Te
  • Page 256 and 257: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 260 and 261: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 262 and 263: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 264 and 265: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 266 and 267: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 268 and 269: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 270 and 271: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 272 and 273: Telematic Environments and Competit
  • Page 274 and 275: Open Source LMS Customization Intro
  • Page 276 and 277: Open Source LMS Customization or ev
  • Page 278 and 279: Open Source LMS Customization compa
  • Page 280 and 281: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 282 and 283: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 284 and 285: Open Source LMS Customization Figur
  • Page 286 and 287: Open Source LMS Customization Haina
  • Page 288 and 289: Evaluation and Effective Learning p
  • Page 290 and 291: Evaluation and Effective Learning r
  • Page 292 and 293: Evaluation and Effective Learning t
  • Page 294 and 295: Evaluation and Effective Learning p
  • Page 296 and 297: Evaluation and Effective Learning m
  • Page 298 and 299: Evaluation and Effective Learning c
  • Page 300 and 301: Evaluation and Effective Learning H
  • Page 302 and 303: Chapter XVI Formative Online Assess
  • Page 304 and 305: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 306 and 307: Formative Online Assessment in E-Le
  • Page 308 and 309:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 310 and 311:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 312 and 313:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 314 and 315:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 316 and 317:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 318 and 319:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 320 and 321:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 322 and 323:

    Formative Online Assessment in E-Le

  • Page 324 and 325:

    0 Chapter XVII Designing an Online

  • Page 326 and 327:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 328 and 329:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 330 and 331:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 332 and 333:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 334 and 335:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 336 and 337:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 338 and 339:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 340 and 341:

    Designing an Online Assessment in E

  • Page 342 and 343:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 344 and 345:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 346 and 347:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 348 and 349:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 350 and 351:

    Quality Assessment of E-Facilitator

  • Page 352 and 353:

    Chapter XIX E-QUAL: A Proposal to M

  • Page 354 and 355:

    E-QUAL is proposed to evaluate the

  • Page 356 and 357:

    E-QUAL provide competent, service-o

  • Page 358 and 359:

    E-QUAL 2004; Scalan, 2003) and qual

  • Page 360 and 361:

    E-QUAL benchmarks address technolog

  • Page 362 and 363:

    E-QUAL E-learning added two differe

  • Page 364 and 365:

    E-QUAL Table 6. Application of the

  • Page 366 and 367:

    E-QUAL Future trends The future of

  • Page 368 and 369:

    E-QUAL (EQO) co-located to the 4 th

  • Page 370 and 371:

    E-QUAL SMEs: An analysis of e-learn

  • Page 372 and 373:

    E-QUAL Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality

  • Page 374 and 375:

    Compilation of References Argyris,

  • Page 376 and 377:

    Compilation of References Biggs, J.

  • Page 378 and 379:

    Compilation of References Cabero, J

  • Page 380 and 381:

    Compilation of References Comezaña

  • Page 382 and 383:

    Compilation of References Downes, S

  • Page 384 and 385:

    Compilation of References Fandos, M

  • Page 386 and 387:

    Compilation of References national

  • Page 388 and 389:

    Compilation of References Hudson, B

  • Page 390 and 391:

    Compilation of References Harbour.

  • Page 392 and 393:

    Compilation of References Little, J

  • Page 394 and 395:

    Compilation of References Metros, S

  • Page 396 and 397:

    Compilation of References ONeill, K

  • Page 398 and 399:

    Compilation of References Preece, J

  • Page 400 and 401:

    Compilation of References Sadler, D

  • Page 402 and 403:

    Compilation of References Shin, N.,

  • Page 404 and 405:

    Compilation of References tional Co

  • Page 406 and 407:

    Compilation of References Vermetten

  • Page 408 and 409:

    Compilation of References Yu, F. Y.

  • Page 410 and 411:

    About the Contributors Juan Pablo d

  • Page 412 and 413:

    About the Contributors part: “An

  • Page 414 and 415:

    About the Contributors María D. R-

  • Page 416 and 417:

    About the Contributors Applications

  • Page 418 and 419:

    Index e-learning tools, automated p

  • Page 420:

    Socrates 55 Sophists 55 student-foc

The Quality Turn. Political and Methodological Challenges in ...
ADVANCES
ROI Methodology for e-Learning Courses - Cecoa
Lexicon of Online and Distance Learning - PEEF's Digital Library
Download Methodology Report - Ministry of Fisheries
proceedings of Student Mobility and ICT: Can E-LEARNING
Online Advanced Placement Courses - WICHE
AMR Corporation Risk Assessment Methodology - IIA Dallas Chapter
Professional Development - Vol. IV, Part I
blended learning activities for advanced proficiency in listening
Danish Museums' Learning Potential
Advanced Training of Trainers - Pathfinder International
Advancing Social Inclusion Albania
TOP - IRC - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
GRAPHIC - ACT - Advanced Communication Technologies
Advanced Effective Communication, Cultural Competence, and ...
Social Media for Government - April 4-7, 2011 - Advanced Learning ...
Collaborative Learning Guide - For Ecosystem Management - CICEET
International Education Guide - China - Enterprise and Advanced ...
International Education Guide - Korea - Enterprise and Advanced ...
(A.S.K.) - Advanced Digital Systems and Services for Education and ...
Review of Advanced e-Assessment Techniques (RAeAT) Final ... - Jisc
What Is a Strategic Learning and Evaluation System (SLES)? - FSG
Project-based learning New Skills for a New Century .pdf
Diversity Pathfinders Evaluation - Communities and Local Government
2013-Series-37-HHS_IEN_ESL_UpdatedMay5final