october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 with them several times after the presentation. The interviews were recorded and encoded. S1 represents the interview results with OPA group; S1-1 represents the interview with the number one team of OPA group. S2 represents the interview with Traditional group, and so on. Students’ opinions on online peer assessment S1-1: Comments and advice from others is helpful to refine our work, but assessing other’s work is even more important and we learn more. S1-3: We could learn useful knowledge and practical skills from this interesting course. At the beginning, we do not know how to review other’s work…we were not sure if our suggestions is correct or not, but after two or three OPA experience, we had more confident when rating our peer. S1-4: Although the figure did not match the requirement at the first try, we adjusted the parameters according to comments from classmates, and the results were better. S1-6: According to the simulation results and online PA, we could summarize the regulation of parameter adjustment, and generalize the operating principle of LEDs. Students in OPA group considered that OPA helped them improve their works effectively. Students of the first, third, fourth, and sixth teams agreed that OPA could help them to modify their works by taking others’ comments. However, some complains which could be a valuable reference to improve the implementation of OPA in PBL were listed as follows. S1-2: Because we had too much subjects to learn in this (junior) year, we could not do our best in this course especially in OPA. Besides, we needed to start preparing for the entrance examination of graduate schools at this year. S1-3 & S1-5: Most of the review comments worked well at the beginning, but sometimes they failed later and misled our focus in the wrong direction on problem solving. We doubted that some reviewers tried to give wrong comment purposely for the sake of getting competitive advantages. S1-4: We always waste much time in adjusting parameters by guessing. When you adjust a new parameter, you have to rerun this program and it took a long time. Students in OPA group showed an over-reliance on the review comments. Moreover, the second/one more indept interview with OPA group members were conducted and it revealed that the prior success experiences which were referred from the review comments as well as their own thinking might also misled or limit their thinking. Furthermore, the first priority of these students was passing the entrance examination of graduate schools to fulfill with the expectation from their parents or society. Therefore, they push themselves very hard to learn effectively and prevent from making any “try and error” which could be harmful to enhance their metacognitive skills and self regulation learning. Students’ opinions on two-stage LED simulation of PBL course Some comments were made by Traditional groups. S2-1: The two-stage LED simulation of PBL was interesting yet challenging. We learned useful things from the course. S2-2 & S2-6: At the very beginning, we felt excited while we knew this PBL course would be provided for us at this semester, but we are frustrated to design LED by guessing the parameters. We are not used to this course; we have no idea how to adjust the parameters from the huge scope of numbers. S2-3, S2-4 & S2-6: We suggest that the teacher give us more references so that we could use them to optimize our parameters. According to the interview results, we discovered that students of both Traditional and OPA groups were not used to such instruction and some of them could not learn independently and actively, which could be the problem for most of students in Taiwan. Some of them also demonstrated a lack of self-confidence when rating their peer, which is similar to the previous studies (Orsmond & Merry, 1996; Sullivan, Hitchcock, & Dunnington, 1999). Students thought that failure caused frustrations and cost too much time. The second and sixth teams of Tradition group indicated that this course differed from those they had taken previously, so they feel excluded and frustrated. Furthermore, students hoped that the teacher could provide more knowledge and hints about the parameters of LED; the students showed an over-reliance on books as well as teacher’s assistance, and were not able to search for information actively. CONCLUSIONS The study addressed and explored how to apply OPA according to the structured level of a problem in a PBL course to enhance students’ professional skills in LED design as well as meta-cognitive thinking. The evaluation results elicit the following relevant facts: (1) OPA group performed better than Traditional group in concept clarification. Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 243
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 (2) For the enhancement of LED design skills in well-structured problem solving, OPA group performed better than Traditional group. (3) For the enhancement of LED design skills in ill-structured problem solving, there was no significant difference between the performances of these two groups. (4) For students’ perception about the effect of OPA applied in PBL, OPA could enhance students’ inquiry learning and reflective thinking skills but creative problem solving and teamwork skills. Most students agreed that the two-stage LED simulation of PBL course was challenging and interesting and they learned useful things from the course. However, the students showed an over-reliance on the review comments or prior success experiences and lost their independent and critical thinking abilities. Most students of OPA considered the PBL course with OPA to be an effective tool in understanding operating principle of LEDs and clarifying concepts which were similar to the studies of Topping (1998), Wen & Tsai (2006), and Liu & Lin (2007). However, the OPA did not work significantly to enhance the students’ professional skills in LED design as well as meta-cognitive thinking in ill-structured problem solving. DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTIONS This study has provided useful evidence on OPA that is applied in PBL, which can help university students clarify concept as well as enhance their inquiry learning, reflective thinking abilities and LED design skills in well-structured problem solving. However, there are some limitations for OPA in ill-structured problem solving as described below. First, the students of OPA declined their learning passions when they failed to solve the ill-structured problems according to the peers’ review comments after several tries. The students showed an over-reliance on the review comments or prior success experiences and lost their independent and critical thinking abilities. The Einstellung effect (set effect) occurs when the first idea that comes to mind, triggered by familiar features of a problem, prevents a better solution being found. It has been shown to affect both people facing novel problems and experts within their field of expertise (Bilalic, McLeod, & Gobet, 2008). It makes learner become inflexible to deal with novel/ill-structured problems, which is harmful to skill learning and skill transfer (Luchins, 1942; Gagne, Yekovich, & Yekovich, 1993). Moreover, the quality of problem definition determined the quality of solution (Getzels, 1975). In the study, some teams of OPA group were misled to the wrong direction in problem definition or solving which were suggested by peer reviewers. Teacher-facilitators could provide a scaffold example to show students how to generate “smart tries” systematically as well as monitor the learners to function systematically (planning, implementing, asking questions/reflective thinking and seeking input adjustment) and reflect on their learning at the end of each try. Secondly, insufficient time and lack of motivation declined students’ participation in OPA. A very unusual phenomenon in Taiwan is that university students started to focus on the preparation for the entrance examination of graduate schools since their sophomore year or junior year. Thus, they do not have enough time to do their best in this course because passing the entrance examination of graduate schools to fulfill with the expectation from their parents or society is the first priority. Besides, some students commented that they learned slowly and they needed more time to get the project done. Wallas (1926) pointed out that a creative problem solving process involved four stages, i.e., preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification, which all took time to implement. Therefore, stimulating students’ motivation required more precaution when the course was developed and implemented. LIMITATIONS Even though a rigorous research procedure was used, this work has some imitations that could be addressed in future studies. First, a quasi-experiment design was adopted without detailing the individual difference of learners. Individual difference variable, such as learning style, could be a direction for future study. Second, the findings and implications are obtained from just one study that examined a particular computer simulation software (i.e., APSYS) and targeted a specific group in Taiwan. Moreover, the OPA group might have more outof-class time to work on their project than the traditional group, even though both OPA group and Traditional group students were required to finish their projects of each stage during the scheduled time. Hence, the positive effect could be partly attributed on more learning time than the intervention (i.e., OPA) alone. Thus, caution must be taken when generalizing our findings and discussion to other educational technologies or groups. Third, the students in Taiwan have unique value and behavior patterns, such as they had different definition on learning achievement and their first priority was to pass the entrance examination. Therefore, a cross-cultural validation using another large sample gathered elsewhere is required for further generalization of our findings. Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 244
Page 2 and 3:
THE TURKISH ONLINE JOURNAL OF EDUCA
Page 4 and 5:
Dear Colleagues, TOJET: The Turkish
Page 6 and 7:
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Annotation retrieval TOJET: The Tur
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Stage 2 Process Stage 3 Output Stag
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Learning effectiveness TOJET: The T
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix A: Questionnaire TOJET: Th
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 TOJET: The Turk
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Computer Use Transformational Leade
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205: TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 226 and 227: Diverger TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 248 and 249: clarify their misconceptions. TOJET
Page 262 and 263: *p < .05 TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 300 and 301: section to the user. TOJET: The Tur
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348 and 349:
Page 350 and 351:
Page 352 and 353:
Page 354 and 355:
Page 356 and 357:
Page 358 and 359:
Page 360 and 361:
Page 362 and 363:
Page 364 and 365:
Page 366 and 367:
Page 368 and 369:
Page 370 and 371:
Statement Analysis TOJET: The Turki
Page 372 and 373:
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Page 380 and 381:
Page 382 and 383:
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
Page 388 and 389:
Appendices TOJET: The Turkish Onlin
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
Page 400 and 401:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 414 and 415:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 416 and 417:
Page 418 and 419:
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
Page 424 and 425:
Page 426 and 427:
eactions TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 428 and 429:
Page 430 and 431:
Page 432 and 433:
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440 and 441:
Page 442 and 443:
Page 444 and 445:
Page 446 and 447:
Page 448 and 449:
Page 450 and 451:
Page 452 and 453:
Page 454 and 455:
Page 456 and 457:
Page 458 and 459:
Page 460 and 461:
Page 462 and 463:
Page 464 and 465:
Page 466 and 467:
Page 468 and 469:
Page 470:
show all

october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?