SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitim ve Bilim / 2013 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 170

Düz anlatım yöntemine göre oluşturulan e-öğrenme türlerinin öğrenci başarısına etkisinin karşılaştırılması

Comparison of the effects of e-learning types designed according to the expository teaching method on student achievement

Necmi EŞGİ
Pages
194–205
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Differences among the students’ achievements were discussed based on the “synchronous instructor effect”.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In accordance with expository teaching, the aim of the research is to determine the effects of five different e-learning types on student achievement.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The designs were carried out with 250 first-year university students attending the course Computer II (Database), distributed to five different groups.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Differences among the students’ achievements were discussed based on the “synchronous instructor effect”.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In accordance with expository teaching, the aim of the research is to determine the effects of five different e-learning types on student achievement. In order to accomplish this, five different e-learning designs dealing with the same subject were formed within the scope of expository teaching. These designs include two synchronous (Instructor-led, Telementoring and E-coaching) and three asynchronous (Learner-led, Facilitated, Embedded) types of e-learning. The designs were carried out with 250 first-year university students attending the course Computer II (Database), distributed to five different groups. The participants were asked to compile a multiple choice achievement test with 40 items. The findings of the study showed that there were significant differences among groups in terms of student achievement. Instructor- led e-learning groups were more successful than other groups. Differences among the students’ achievements were discussed based on the “synchronous instructor effect”.

Özet

Araştırmanın amacı, düz anlatım yöntemine göre oluşturulan beş farklı e-öğrenme türünün öğrenci başarısına etkisinin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Aynı konuya ilişkin düz anlatım yöntemini gerçekleştiren beş farklı e-öğrenme türü tasarlanmıştır. Bu tasarımlar iki senkron (eğitmen önderliğinde, tele-danışmanlık ve e-koçluk ), üç asenkron (öğrenci önderliğinde, yönlendirilmiş, zenginleştirilmiş) e-öğrenme türlerinden oluşmaktadır. Tasarımlar 250 üniversite birinci sınıf öğrencisinin katıldığı Bilgisayar II dersinde beş ayrı gruba uygulanmıştır. Katılımcılara 40 maddeden oluşan çoktan seçmeli başarı testi uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, gruplar arasında öğrenci başarısı açısından anlamlı farklar olduğunu göstermiştir. Eğitmen önderliğinde eğitim yapılan grup diğerlerine göre daha başarılı bulunmuştur. Öğrenci başarısındaki farlılıklar “senkronize eğitmen etkisi” temelinde tartışılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

EŞGİ, N. (2022). Düz anlatım yöntemine göre oluşturulan e-öğrenme türlerinin öğrenci başarısına etkisinin karşılaştırılması. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 170, 194–205. https://ajindex.com/articles/497557

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Ausubel, D., Novak, J., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Askun, C. S. (2007). Web-based forums: Effects of their use on students’ success. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2007 (pp. 2308-2315).
  2. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Barbour, M. & Collins, M. (2005). Online writing as an indicator of student performance. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(8), http://www.itdl.org/ Journal /Aug_05/. Accessed September 5 2010.
  3. EATM (2008). Human factors, guidelines on the use of e-learning in ATMpart2. http://www. eurocontrol.int/humanfactors/gallery/content/public/docs/DELIVERABLES/ELearning _Guidance_V2_Mar08_GUI_HUM.pdf. Accessed October 15 2010.
  4. Esgi, N. (2011). Comparison of the Impacts of Telementoring Services on Protégés’ Academic Achievements and Opinions. The Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry (TOJQI), 2(4). Fleck, H. (1974). Toward a better teaching of home economics (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Gagne, R. B. (1985). The conditions of learning (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston,Inc. Gulbahar, Y. (2009). E-Learning. Ankara:
  5. Pegem Academy Publishing. Hyman, R. T. (1970). Wavs of teaching. New York: J. B. Lippincott Company. Hill, S. (2009) An Investigation of the Impact of Asynchronous Online Learning on Student Achievement Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation.Capella University. Horton, W. & Horton, K. (2003). E-Learning tools and technologies. USA: Wiley Publishing. Horton,W. (2006) E-Learning by design. USA: Wiley Publishing,Inc. Ilie, S.M. & Pavel C. (2006) E-learning technigues to study dynamics of mechanism. Research Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education.http://era.teipir.gr/era1/ b.4.tele-education_session /abstracts/b.4.8.doc. Accessed October 8, 2010.
  6. Ilie, S.M. & Pavel C. (2008). Mechanics applications Solved On-line. http://adlunap. r o / e l s e / papers/062.-677.2.Ilie%20Simona%20-20mechanics%20aplications.pdf. Accessed October 20, 2010.
  7. Johnson, S. D., Aragon, S. R., Shaik, N., & Palma-Rivas, N. (2000). Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(1), 29-49. Kokkosis, Α., Charitopoulos, A., Prekas, C., & Athanasopoulou, L. (2006) E-learning present and future in Greece.http: