LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,149
تعداد مقالات10,518
تعداد مشاهده مقاله45,415,472
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله11,291,245
Mahmoodi, Firooz, Zeynolabedini Shahir, Saeed. (1402). Assessing the Student’s Perspectives on E-learning Based on Community of Inquiry Framework: A Cross-sectional Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14(4), 318-329. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.95419.1157
Firooz Mahmoodi; Saeed Zeynolabedini Shahir. "Assessing the Student’s Perspectives on E-learning Based on Community of Inquiry Framework: A Cross-sectional Study". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14, 4, 1402, 318-329. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.95419.1157
Mahmoodi, Firooz, Zeynolabedini Shahir, Saeed. (1402). 'Assessing the Student’s Perspectives on E-learning Based on Community of Inquiry Framework: A Cross-sectional Study', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14(4), pp. 318-329. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.95419.1157
Mahmoodi, Firooz, Zeynolabedini Shahir, Saeed. Assessing the Student’s Perspectives on E-learning Based on Community of Inquiry Framework: A Cross-sectional Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1402; 14(4): 318-329. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.95419.1157

Assessing the Student’s Perspectives on E-learning Based on Community of Inquiry Framework: A Cross-sectional Study

Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences
مقاله 7، دوره 14، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 55، اسفند 2023، صفحه 318-329    اصل مقاله (521.32 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.95419.1157
نویسندگان
Firooz Mahmoodi1؛ Saeed Zeynolabedini Shahir* 2
1Department of Education, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
2Department of Curriculum Studies, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده
Background: The expansion of e-learning has made it necessary to pay attention to the quality of the teaching and learning. This study was conducted with the aim of assessing the dimensions of the students’ presence in e-learning based on Community of Inquiry (COI) Framework at the University of Tabriz, Iran.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 217 undergraduate students of the Department of Educational Science, at the University of Tabriz, Iran, in the months of February to May of the academic year 2020-2021, were selected using simple random method. The community of inquiry framework questionnaire with 34 items in three subscales of teaching presence (13 items), social presence (9 items) and cognitive presence (12 items) which were scored based on a 5-point Likert scale was used to collect the data; its validity was approved by experts, and its reliability was estimated using Cronbach’s alpha (0.94). One-sample t-test and Pearson Product-Moment Correlation was used to analyze the data in SPSS 26.
Results: The results showed that teaching (3.83±0.55), social (3.47±0.72) and cognitive presence (3.66±0.53) of students in e-learning was significantly (P<0.001) higher than the cutoff point. Also, correlation coefficient was calculated between the students’ daily study hours and teaching presence (r=0.17, P=0.017), social presence (r=0.185, P=0.009), and cognitive presence (r=0.285, P<0.001).
Conclusion: The COI framework suggests that presence elements are essential for e-learning and fully support constructivism and connectivism, which reduce transactional distance. In this study, it was found that the students perceived a high level of presence in their e-learning experiences, which indicates an acceptable quality level of the virtual courses offered by the university. Therefore, in order to improve learning in e-learning, it is necessary to increase the social and cognitive presence of students instead of paying attention to teaching presence.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Distance؛ Education؛ E-learning؛ Community of inquiry framework؛ Teaching presence؛ Social presence؛ Cognitive presence
مراجع
  1. Allen IE, Seaman J. Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. 2014 Jan.
  2. Sun A, Chen X. Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education. 2016 Jan 1;15. doi:10.28945/3502.
  3. Robb CA, Sutton J. The importance of social presence and motivation in distance learning. Journal of Technology, Management & Applied Engineering. 2014 Apr 1;31.
  4. Frydenberg J. Persistence in university continuing education online classes. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2007;8(3):1-5. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v8i3.375.
  5. Conrad RM, Donaldson JA. Continuing to engage the online learner: More activities and resources for creative instruction. John Wiley & Sons; 2012 Jul 18.
  6. Abbasi Kasani H, Shams GR. A research synthesis of critical success factors of e-learning: A model development. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2018 Dec 22;13(1):25-39. (in Persian). doi:10.22061/jte.2018.3061.1777.
  7. Ahmady G, Nakhostin-Ruhi N. Investigation of the differentiation of blended learning with electronical learning and traditional learning (face to face) in teaching mathemats. Journal of school psychology. 2014 Aug 22;3(2):7-26. (in Persian).
  8. Srivastava P. Advantages & disadvantages of e-education & e-learning. Journal of Retail Marketing & Distribution Management. 2019;2(3):22-7.
  9. Ouzts KN. Online student satisfaction survey, nursing student at the University of Wyoming. Unpublished raw data. Laramie. 2001.
  10. Simpson* O. The impact on retention of interventions to support distance learning students. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 2004 Feb 1;19(1):79-95. doi:10.1080/0268051042000177863.
  11. Wimbish JB. Listening to the voices of students: the role of student-teacher interaction to course completion in on-line courses. Michigan State University; 2001.
  12. Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M. Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American journal of distance education. 2005 Sep 1;19(3):133-48. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2.
  13. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of distance education. 2001 Jan 1;15(1):7-23. doi:10.1080/08923640109527071.
  14. Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M, Koole M, Kappelman J. Revisiting methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability. The internet and higher education. 2006 Jan 1;9(1):1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001.
  15. Stenbom S. A systematic review of the Community of Inquiry survey. The Internet and Higher Education. 2018 Oct 1; 39:22-32. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.06.001.
  16. Biocca F. Can we resolve the book, the physical reality, and the dream state problems? From the two-pole to a three-pole model of shifts in presence. InEU Future and Emerging Technologies, Presence Initiative Meeting 2003 May 5 (Vol. 12, pp. 13-69). Venice, Italy: Citeseer.
  17. Delello JA, McWhorter RR, Lawrence H. Fostering a community of inquiry in online discussions. Academic Exchange Quarterly. 2019;23(1):51-7. doi:10.12348/IJAS20220608.
  18. Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M, Fung TS. Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The internet and higher education. 2010 Jan 1;13(1-2):31-6. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002.
  19. Shea P, Bidjerano T. Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education. 2009 Apr 1;52(3):543-53. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007.
  20. Garrison DR. Self-directed learning and distance education. Handbook of distance education. 2003 Apr 2:161-8.
  21. Shea P, Li CS, Pickett A. A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and higher education. 2006 Jul 1;9(3):175-90. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005.
  22. McNeill L, Rice M, Wright V. An Exploratory Factor Analysis of a Teaching Presence Instrument and the ICAP Framework in an Online Computer Applications Course. InGlobal Learn 2019 Jul 10 (pp. 310-317). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  23. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education. 1999 Mar 1;2(2-3):87-105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6.
  24. Garrison DR, Arbaugh JB. Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and higher education. 2007 Jan 1;10(3):157-72. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001.
  25. Thompson P, Vogler JS, Xiu Y. Strategic tooling: Technology for constructing a community of inquiry. Journal of Educators Online. 2017 Jul;14(2): n2. doi:10.9743/jeo.2017.14.2.10.
  26. Garrison DR. Cognitive presences for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction. 2003;4(1):47-58.
  27. Zhu M, Kadirova D. Self-directed learners’ perceptions and experiences of learning computer science through MIT open courseware. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 2020 Jun 19:1-6. doi: 10.1080/02680513.2020.1781606
  28. Brookfield S. Understanding and facilitating adult learning: A comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. McGraw-Hill Education (UK); 1986 Jun 1.
  29. Brookfield SD. Powerful techniques for teaching adults. John Wiley & Sons; 2013 Feb 19.
  30. Lear JL, Isernhagen JC, LaCost BA, King JW. Instructor presence for web-based classes. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal. 2009 Apr 1;51(2).
  31. Bulu ST. Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds. Computers & Education. 2012 Jan 1;58(1):154-61. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.024.
  32. Filippou F. The first woman’s dancer improvisation in the area of Roumlouki (Alexandria) through the dance “Tis Marias”. Ethnologia. 2015; 6:1-24.
  33. Sung E, Mayer RE. Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Computers in human behavior. 2012 Sep 1;28(5):1738-47. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.014.
  34. Hosler KA, Arend BD. The importance of course design, feedback, and facilitation: student perceptions of the relationship between teaching presence and cognitive presence. Educational Media International. 2012 Sep 1;49(3):217-29. doi:10.1080/09523987.2012.738014.
  35. Alman SW, Frey BA, Tomer C. Social and cognitive presence as factors in learning and student retention: An investigation of the cohort model in an iSchool setting. Journal of Education for library and Information Science. 2012 Oct 1:290-302.
  36. Ladyshewsky R. Instructor presence in online courses and student satisfaction. The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2013;7(1):1-23. doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070113.
  37. Tan C. The impact of COVID-19 on student motivation, community of inquiry and learning performance. Asian Education and Development Studies. 2020 Dec 29. doi:10.1108/AEDS-05-2020-0084.
  38. Mackey KR, Freyberg DL. The effect of social presence on affective and cognitive learning in an international engineering course taught via distance learning. Journal of Engineering Education. 2010 Jan;99(1):23-34. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830. 2010.tb01039.x.
  39. Yandra FP, Alsolami B, Sopacua IO, Prajogo W. The role of community of inquiry and self-efficacy on accounting students’ satisfaction in online learning environment. Jurnal Siasat Bisnis. 2021 Jan 7;25(1):1-6. doi: 10.20885/jsb.vol25.iss1.art1.
  40. Bangert A. The influence of social presence and teaching presence on the quality of online critical inquiry. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2008 Sep;20(1):34-61. doi:10.1007/BF03033431.
  41. Lee R, Hoe Looi K, Faulkner M, Neale L. The moderating influence of environment factors in an extended community of inquiry model of e-learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. 2021 Jan 2;41(1):1-5. doi:10.1080/02188791.2020.1758032.
  42. Al-Asfour A. Examining student satisfaction of online statistics courses. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC). 2012 Jan 3;9(1):33-8. doi:10.19030/tlc. v9i1.6764.
  43. Vernadakis N, Derri V, Tsitskari E, Antoniou P. The effect of Xbox Kinect intervention on balance ability for previously injured young competitive male athletes: a preliminary study. Physical Therapy in Sport. 2014 Aug 1;15(3):148-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2013.08.004
  44. Choo J, Bakir N, Scagnoli NI, Ju B, Tong X. Using the Community of Inquiry framework to understand students’ learning experience in online undergraduate business courses. TechTrends. 2020 Jan;64(1):172-81. doi:10.1007/s11528-019-00444-9.
  45. Joo YJ, Lim KY, Kim EK. Online university students’ satisfaction and persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model. Computers & education. 2011 Sep 1;57(2):1654-64. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.008.
  46. Li K, Peterson M, Wang Q. Using community of inquiry to Scaffold language learning in out-of-school gaming: A case study. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL). 2021 Jan 1;11(1):31-52. doi:10.4018/IJGBL.2021010103.
  47. Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers & Education, 55(2), 808-820. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.013…
  48. khazai, S., arefi, M. Investigating the Level of Teaching Presence, Cognitive Presence and Social Presence at Web - Based Courses: The Case Study of Shahid Beheshti University. New Educational Approaches, 2020; 15(2): 161-178. (in Persian). doi: 10.22108/nea.2021.126621.1579.
  49. Narenji Sani, F., Amoee, N., Hejazi, S. The relationship between the community of inquiry and the students’ learning outcomes in e-learning environments. Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences, 2021; 11(43): 65-85. (in Persian). doi: 20.1001.1.222853.1400.11.3.4.6.
  50. Taqizade A, Hatami J. Investigating the Relationship among Educational, Social and Cognitive Presences with Students’ Academic Performance in E-learning Courses. A Path Analysis Study. Education Strategies in Medical Sciences. 2019 Jan 10;11(5):169-77. (in Persian). doi: 10.29252/edcbmj.11.05.19.
  51. Zahedi, M., khodabandelou, R., Mehran, G. Community of Inquiry and Perceived Learning: A Study of a Blended Learning Environment. Iranian Journal of Learning & Memory, 2019; 1(4): 51-57. doi: 10.22034/iepa.2019.86026.
  52. Arbaugh JB, Cleveland-Innes M, Diaz SR, Garrison DR, Ice P, Richardson JC, Swan KP. Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The internet and higher education. 2008 Jan 1;11(3-4):133-6. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003.
  53. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology. 1975 Dec 1;28(4):563-75. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570. 1975.tb01393.x.
  54. Waltz CF, Bausell BR. Nursing research: design statistics and computer analysis. Davis Fa; 1981 Jan 1.
  55. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in nursing & health. 2006 Oct;29(5):489-97. doi: 10.1002/nur.20147.
  56. Tu CH, McIsaac M. The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American journal of distance education. 2002 Sep 1;16(3):131-50. doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2.
  57. Abedin B, Daneshgar F, D’Ambra J. Underlying factors of sense of community in asynchronous computer supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2010 Sep 1;6(3):585-96.
  58. Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The internet and higher education. 2010 Jan 1;13(1-2):5-9. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003.
  59. Whiteside AL, Garrett Dikkers A, Lewis S. The power of social presence for learning. EDUCAUSE Review Online. 2014 Jul 12. doi:10.1145/2693839.2686759.
  60. Yamada M, Goda Y. Application of social presence principles to CSCL design for quality interactions. InEducational stages and interactive learning: From kindergarten to workplace training 2012 (pp. 31-48). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0137-6.ch003.
  61. Mykota D. The Effective Affect: A Scoping Review of Social Presence. International journal of e-learning & distance education. 2018;33(2): n2.
  62. Almusharraf A, Almusharraf N. Socio-interactive practices and personality within an EFL online learning environments. Education and Information Technologies. 2021 Jul;26(4):3947-66. doi:10.1007/s10639-021-10449-8.
  63. Karataş K, Arpacı İ. The role of self-directed learning, metacognition, and 21st century skills predicting the readiness for online learning.
  64. Sun W, Hong JC, Dong Y, Huang Y, Fu Q. Self-directed learning predicts online learning engagement in higher education mediated by perceived value of knowing learning goals. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2023 Jun;32(3):307-16. doi:10.1007/s40299-022-00653-6.
  65. Brandt WC. Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Creativity. 21st Century Success Skills. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment. 2021 Nov.
  66. Gray JA, DiLoreto M. The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation. 2016 May;11(1): n1.
  67. Auliarahmi R. Pengaruh Self-Directed Learning terhadap Cognitive Presence Mahasiswa Unisba dalam pembelajaran E-learning. InBandung Conference Series: Psychology Science 2022 Jan 21 (Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 356-363). doi:10.29313/bcsps. v2i1.1102.
  68. Zhang W, Chen W, Wang R, Zhao H, Yuan E, Wang Z. The Presence Design of Online Teaching based on CoI Model. In2020 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Educational Informatization (CSEI) 2020 Jun 12 (pp. 225-229). IEEE. doi:10.1109/CSEI50228.2020.9142498.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 193
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 211


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب