You are here:

[Chais] Lifelong Learning at the Technion: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of and Experiences in Distance Learning
ARTICLE

, , , Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

IJELLO Volume 8, Number 1, ISSN 1552-2237 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Full Text

Abstract

This study examined the development of two Distance Learning (DL) courses and their effect on students' perceptions and learning experiences. Our study included about 260 science and engineering graduate students. Among them, 105 students were divided into two research groups: oncampus students (N=70) and DL students (N=35). These two groups served as a traditional classroom setting and an online setting, respectively. Data was collected through an online questionnaire consisting of both open-ended and close-ended questions and analyzed via the mixed methods model. Findings indicated that the DL students asserted positive perceptions of their learning experiences compared to the on-campus students. Female DL students were more confident about their ability to communicate with their classmates and lecturers in comparison to their male DL peers. We also found that younger students, in comparison to older ones, held higher positive opinions about the quality of the DL courses and the support they received from the lecturer and the teaching assistants. Content analysis revealed four main categories related to lifelong learning via DL: cognitive and professional skills, affective learning, social interactions, and resource management. Learning about students' perceptions of and experiences in DL is an important step toward improving the next generation of online courses in higher education.

Citation

Hussein-Farraj, R., Barak, M. & Dori, Y. (2012). [Chais] Lifelong Learning at the Technion: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of and Experiences in Distance Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 8(1), 115-135. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved February 20, 2020 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2005). Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States. Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) [online]. Available at http://www.sloan-C.org/resources/growing_by_degrees.pdf Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on demand: Online education in the United States, 2009. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
  2. Anderson, T., & Garrison, D.R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. In C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education (pp. 97–112). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
  3. Arbaugh, J., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2007). The importance of participant interaction in online environments. Decision Support Systems, 43, 853-865.
  4. Barak, M., & Dori, Y.J. (2005). Enhancing undergraduate students' chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89(1), 117-139.
  5. Barak, M., & Dori, Y.J. (2009). Enhancing higher order thinking skills among in-service science teachers via embedded assessment. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(5), 459-474.
  6. Barak, M., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). On-line question-posing and peer-assessment as means for web-based knowledge sharing in learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61, 84-103.
  7. Barrett, E., & Lally, V. (1999). Gender differences in an on-line learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15, 48–60.
  8. Bonk, C.J., Wisher, R.A., & Lee, J. (2003). Moderating learner-centered e-learning: Problems and solutions, benefits and implications. In T.S. Roberts (Ed.), Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice (pp. 54-85). Idea Group Publishing.
  9. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technology in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
  10. Denzin, N.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  11. Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000). Introduction. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 1-28). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  12. Dori, Y.J. (2007). Educational reform at MIT: Advancing and evaluating technology-based projects on-and off-campus. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(4), 279-281.
  13. Dori, Y.J., Yarden, H., & Allouche, A. (2012). Fostering scientific literacy in bioengineering hybrid courses. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Indianapolis, IN, USA, March.
  14. Flottemesch, K. (2000). Building effective interaction in distance education: A review of the literature, Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 46-51.
  15. Garrison, D.R., & Shale, D. (1990). Education of distance: From issues to practice. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
  16. Graves, W.H. (1997). Free trade in higher education: The meta university. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 1(1), 97-108.
  17. Gorsky, P., & Caspi, A. (2005). A critical analysis of transactional distance theory. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6(1), 1-11.
  18. Gunawardena, C.N., & Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computermediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26.
  19. Hammond, M. (1999). Issues associated with participation in online forums-The case of the communicative learner. Education and Information Technologies, 4(4), 353–367.
  20. Hegarty, J., Bostock, S., & Collins, D. (2000). Staff development in information technology for special needs: A new, distance-learning course at Keele University. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 199-212.
  21. Hong, S., & Jung, I. (2011). The distance learner competencies: A three-phased empirical approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 21-42.
  22. Hostetter, C., & Busch, M. (2006). Measuring up online: The relationship between social presence and student learning satisfaction. Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 1–12.
  23. Hussein-Farraj, R., Barak, M., & Dori, Y.J. (2011). Initiating a distance education program: Perceptions and preferences of STEM graduate students. National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Orlando, USA, April.
  24. Hussein-Farraj, R., Barak, M., & Dori, Y.J. (2012). Initiating a distance education program: Attitudes and preferences of STEM graduate students. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Indianapolis, IN, USA, March. Jones, N., & O'shea, J. (2004). Challenging hierarchies: The impact of e-learning. Higher Education, 48, 379-395.
  25. Johnston, R.B., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14-26.
  26. Kali, Y., Levine-Peled, R., & Dori, Y.J. (2009). The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in higher-education. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1067-1078.
  27. Kim, J., Kwon, Y., & Cho, D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education. Computers& Education, 57, 1512-1520.
  28. Kawachi, P. (2003). Support for collaborative e-learning in Asia. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 46-59. Available at www.AsianJDE.org
  29. Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260–271.
  30. Lee, Y., & Pituch, K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computer& Education, 47, 222-244.
  31. Liu, C.C., & Lee, J.H. (2005). Prompting conceptual understanding with computer-mediated peer discourse and knowledge acquisition techniques. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 821– 837.
  32. Li, L. (2005). Distance learning programs in the world. Reaching out to the world: Programs through distance education to Asian countries. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 3(1), 16.
  33. Martinez-Caro, E. (2009). Factors affecting effectiveness in e-learning: An analysis in production management courses. Computer Application in Engineering Education. Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com);
  34. McIsaac, M.S. & Gunawardena, C.N. (1996). Distance Education. In D.H. Jonassen, ed. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology: a project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (pp. 403-437). New York: Simon& Schuster Macmillan
  35. Moore, M.G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22-38). New York: Routledge.
  36. Moore, M.G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M.G. Moore (Ed.), The handbook of distance education (2nd ed.) (pp. 89–108). Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  37. Moore, M.G., & Kearseley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  38. Powell, G.C. (2000). Are you ready for WBT? Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper39/paper39.html
  39. Pituch, K.A., & Lee, Y.-K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers& Education, 47, 222-244.
  40. Passerini, K., & Granger, M. (2000). A developmental model for distance learning using the Internet. Computer& Education, 34, 1-15.
  41. Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). E-learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  42. Ross, J.A. (1996). The influence of computer communication skills on participation in a computer conferencing course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15(1), 37–52.
  43. Schrum, L., & Ohler, J. (2005). Distance education at UAS: A case study. Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 60-83.
  44. Shin, N., & Chan, J. (2004). Direct and indirect effects of online learning on distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 275-288.
  45. Smith, B. & Necessary, J. (1996). The computer ability scale: Replication and extension involving college computer literacy students. In D.H. Rehman (Ed.), AERA business education and information systems research special interest group proceedings. American Education Research Association, Washington, DC, (ERIC No. ED 395 218).
  46. Wu, D., & Hiltz, R. (2004). Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussion. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139-152.
  47. Williams, P.E. (2003). Roles and competencies of distance education programs in higher education institutions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 45–57.
  48. Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender differences in self-regulated online learning environment. Educational Technology& Society, 12(3), 12-22.
  49. Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Chun Lai, B., & Tan, H. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Records, 107, 1836-1884.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links