KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education / 2013 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

From Physical Benchmarks To Mental Benchmarks: A Four Dimensions Dynamic Model To Assure The Quality Of Instructional Activities In Electronic And Virtual Learning Environments

Hamdy Ahmed ABDELAZIZ
Sayfa
268–281
Yayın Tarihi
2013-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Applying the proposed model will improve the process of developing e-based activities throughout a set of adaptive and dynamic frameworks and guidelines to meet online learner’s cognitive, psychological, social and mental presence.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The objective of this paper was to develop a four dimensions dynamic model for designing instructional activities appropriate to electronic and virtual learning environments.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:It will work as psychological schema to decrease the load of learning at distance.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Applying the proposed model will improve the process of developing e-based activities throughout a set of adaptive and dynamic frameworks and guidelines to meet online learner’s cognitive, psychological, social and mental presence.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:e-Learning · Virtual learning · Instructional Activities

Abstract

The objective of this paper was to develop a four dimensions dynamic model for designing instructional activities appropriate to electronic and virtual learning environments. The suggested model is guided by learning principles of cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism learning theories in order to help online learners to build and acquire meaningful knowledge and experiences. The proposed model consists of four dynamic dimensions: Ø Cognitive presence activities; Ø Psychological presence activities; Ø Social presence activities; and Ø Mental presence activities. Cognitive presence activities refer to learner’s ability to emerge a cognitive vision regarding the content of learning. The cognitive vision will be the starting point to construct meaningful understanding. Psychological presence activities refer to the learner’s ability to construct self awareness and trustworthiness. It will work as psychological schema to decrease the load of learning at distance. Social presence activities refer to the learner’s ability to share knowledge with others in a way to construct a community of practice and assure global understanding of learning. Finally, mental presence activities refer to learner’s ability to construct mental models that represent knowledge creation. It will help learners to make learning outcomes and experiences transferable. Applying the proposed model will improve the process of developing e-based activities throughout a set of adaptive and dynamic frameworks and guidelines to meet online learner’s cognitive, psychological, social and mental presence.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ABDELAZIZ, H. A. (2013). From Physical Benchmarks To Mental Benchmarks: A Four Dimensions Dynamic Model To Assure The Quality Of Instructional Activities In Electronic And Virtual Learning Environments. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 268–281. https://ajindex.com/articles/141077

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (5)

  1. Abdelaziz, H. A. (2012). D4 S4: A four dimensions instructional strategy for Web-based learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(4), 220-235.
  2. Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. H. Jonassen, & S. M. Land (eds. ) Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Corconran, K., Laura, K., Daniel, B., & Mark, B. (1995). High performance sales organizations: Achieving competitive advantage in the global marketplace. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publications. Corso, D., Forno, L., Morrone, G., & Signorile, I. (2006). Development of didactic design guidelines for the production of e-courses. Paper presented at the 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. October 28-31, 2006.
  3. San Diego, CA. Dacko, S. G. (2006). Narrowing the skills gap for marketers of the future. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(3), pp. 283-295.
  4. Driscoll, M. (2002). Psychological foundations of instructional design. In Robert A. R. & John V. D. (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 57-69). NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Gillani, B. B. (2003). Learning theories and design of e-learning environments. NY: University Press of America, Inc. Harris, J. (1998). Virtual architecture: Designing and directing curriculum-based telecomputing. Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Summer 2009, 41, 4. 393-416.
  5. Heide, A., & Henderson, D. (2001). Active learning in the digital age classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Horton, W. (2008). Knowledge management: From the graveyard of good ideas. In S. Carliner & P. Shank (Eds.), The e-learning handbook: Past promises, present challenges (p. 105). CA: Pfeiffer. Available from the page of http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20(Version%201).pdf International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) (2002). National educational technology standards for teachers: Preparing teachers to use technology. Eugene, OR: Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall. Loureiro, A., & Bettencourt, T. (2010). Immersive environments: A connectivist approach. Communications