SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2

UNIVERSITY STAKEHOLDERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARD UTILIZING E-TUTORING FOR DISTANCE LEARNING IN SOUTH-WEST, NIGERIA

Oyeronke Olufunmilola OGUNLADE
Esther JOSHUA
Charles Olubode OLUMORIN
Pages
71–86
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results indicated :stakeholders had positive attitude (mean score :3.10); no significant difference between male and female ( t-test value of df (155), t = 1.49, p > .05); no significant difference between experienced and less experienced (t-test value of df (155), t = -.84, p > .05); no significant difference between stakeholders(df (155), t = 1.69, p > .05).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examined University stakeholders’ (academic and technical staff) attitude toward the use of E-tutoring for distance learning in Nigeria.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Questionnaire was used to collect data from 157 respondents involved.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results indicated :stakeholders had positive attitude (mean score :3.10); no significant difference between male and female ( t-test value of df (155), t = 1.49, p > .05); no significant difference between experienced and less experienced (t-test value of df (155), t = -.84, p > .05); no significant difference between stakeholders(df (155), t = 1.69, p > .05).
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study examined University stakeholders’ (academic and technical staff) attitude toward the use of E-tutoring for distance learning in Nigeria. It specifically investigated attitude towards the use of E-tutoring based on gender, working experience and area of specialization. Questionnaire was used to collect data from 157 respondents involved. Four research questions were answered while three hypotheses were tested. Mean and percentage were used to answer the research questions and independent t-test for the hypotheses. Results indicated :stakeholders had positive attitude (mean score :3.10); no significant difference between male and female ( t-test value of df (155), t = 1.49, p > .05); no significant difference between experienced and less experienced (t-test value of df (155), t = -.84, p > .05); no significant difference between stakeholders(df (155), t = 1.69, p > .05). It was recommended that etutoring should be more incorporated into distance learning in Nigeia

🔖

Cite This Article

OGUNLADE, O. O., JOSHUA, E., OLUMORIN, C. O. (2022). UNIVERSITY STAKEHOLDERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARD UTILIZING E-TUTORING FOR DISTANCE LEARNING IN SOUTH-WEST, NIGERIA. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 2, 71–86. https://ajindex.com/articles/442575

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bassfar, Z., Rozinah, J., & Merza, A. (2012). Investigate the self-efficacy and attitudes of teachers towards e-learning in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 3(6). Retrieved from http://www.ijser.org
  2. Bennett, S., & Marsh, D. (2002). Are we expecting online tutors to run before they can walk? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39 (1), 14-20.
  3. Brigitte, D., Philip, W., Sébastien, P. & Nathalie, V. (2004). Roles and Competencies of the e-Tutor. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/v46IXm
  4. Catherine, W. (2012). Online collaborative learning in health care education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ979596.pdf
  5. Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 411-433
  6. Dawes, L. (2001). What stops teachers using new technology? In M. Leask (Ed.), Issues in Teaching using ICT. London: Routledge, 61-79
  7. Dyck, J. L. & Smither, J. A. (1996). Older adults’ acquisition of word processing. The contribution of cognitive abilities and computer anxiety. Computer in Human Behavior, 12 (1), 107-119. e-Learners.com (2014). Synchronous vs. asynchronous classes [blog]. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/4Zb1Tn
  8. Helland, K. (2002). Perception of Distance Learning and the Effects on Selection Decision. Retrieved from http://bus.utk.edu?iopsyc/pdf/Perception-of-Distance-Educationsiop2003.pdf Johns Hopkins University School of Education, Center for Technology in Education (2010). Synchronous vs. asynchronous distance learning activities. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/9r754N
  9. Johnson, G. M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TechTrends. 50 (4), 46-53
  10. Kadel, R. (2005). How teacher attitude affect technology. Learning and leading with Technology, 39 (5), 34-47.
  11. Kirschner, P. & Woperies, I. G. J. H. (2003). Pedagogic benchmarks of information and communication technology in teacher education. Technology Pedagogy and education, 12 (1), 127-149
  12. Len, D. (n.d). ICT in education is important. Retrieved from http://www.naace.co.uk/resources/1068
  13. Littlejohn, S. (2002). Theories of human communication. California:Wadsworth Thomson Learning. Lonchamp, J. (2006). Supporting synchronous collaborative learning: a generic, multi-dimensional model, International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning