THE EFFECT OF WEB BASED INSTRUCTION ON WEB PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE, ACHIEVEMENT AND SATISFACTION

Year 2012, Volume: 41 Issue: 1, 25 - 40, 08.03.2014

Mehmet Horzum

Abstract

The main aim of this research is to determine the effect of web based instruction on students’ web pedagogical content knowledge, academic achievement and the general satisfaction of the course. The study was planned and completed according to pre test and post test with control group experimental design. The study was carried out on 29 students. The web content knowledge of the students in both group showed significant change after the experimental procedure. The web pedagogical content knowledge and the attitudes towards web based instruction of the experiment group were found to be higher than control group after the course. Also the academic achievement of experiment group was higher than control group and there was no difference in course satisfaction.

Keywords

Web Based Instruction, Web Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Achievement

References

• Aggarwal, A. (2000). Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges. Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.
• Akkoyunlu, B. & Yılmaz, M. (2005). Öğretmen adaylarının bilgi okuryazarlık düzeyleri ile internet kullanım sıklıkları ve internet kullanım amaçları. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 5(19), 1-14.
• Alessi, S. M. & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Computer-based instruction: Methods and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade online education in the United States, 2006. The Sloan Consortium (SLOAN-C). Retrieved August 11, 2010, from www.sloan-c.org.
• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand Online Education in the United States, 2009. The Sloan Consortium (SLOAN-C). August 11, 2010, from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf.
• Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education. The American Journal of Distance Education. 16(2), 83-97.
• Askar, P., Dönmez, O., Kızılkaya, G., Çevik, V. & Gültekin, K., (2005). The dimensions of student satisfaction on on-line learning programs. Encyclopedia of Distance Learning Vol 4. (Ed: Howard, C et. al), Idea-Group Reference, 585-590.
• Atav, E., Akkoyunlu, B., & Sağlam, N. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının internete erişim olanakları ve kullanım amaçları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, 37-44.
• Bekele, T. A. (2010). Motivation and satisfaction in internet-supported learning environments: A review. Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 116–127.
• Bekele, T. A., & Menchaca, M. P. (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(4), 373–406.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (9.baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
• Carswell, L. (2000). Distance education via the Internet: The student experience. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 29-46.
• Chou, C., & Tsai, C. C. (2002). Developing web-based curricula: Issues and challenges. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 623–636.
• Collins, M. (2000).Comparing web, correspondence and lecture versions of a second-year non-major biology course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 21-27.
• Cox, S. (2008). A conceptual analyses of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Unpublished thesis. US: Department of Instructional Psychology & Technology, Brigham Young University.
• Duggan, A., Hess, B., Morgan, D., Kim, S., & Wilson, K. (2001). Measuring students’ attitudes toward educational use of the Internet. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(3), 267-281.
• Ferguson, J. M., & DeFelice, A. E. (2010). Length of online course and student satisfaction, perceived learning, and academic performance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(2). Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://www.irrodl.org/ index.php/irrodl/article/ viewArticle/772/1547.
• Finlay, W., Desmet, C., & Evans, L. (2004). Is it the technology or the teacher? A comparison of online and traditional English composition classes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(2), 163-180.
• Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th Ed.). New York: Mac Graw Hill, Inc.
• Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., Shea, P., & Swan, K. (2000). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 14(2). Retrieved August 18, 2010 from http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol14_issue2/le/ Fredericksen/LE-fredericksen.htm.
• Gagné, M., & Shepherd, M. (2001). Distance learning in accounting: A comparison between a distance and traditional graduate accounting class. T.H.E. Journal, 28(9), 58-65. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://thejournal.com/articles/2001/04/01/a-comparison-between-a-distance-and-a-traditional-graduate-accounting-class.aspx.
• Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2005). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data, (Fourth Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
• Gunawardena, C. N. & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26.
• Hiltz, S. R. (1997). Impacts of college-level courses via asynchronous learning networks: some preliminary results. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1(2). Retrieved August 11, 2010 from http://general.utpb.edu/FAC/keast_d/Tunebooks/ pdf/Hiltz%20Article.pdf.
• Hislop, G. (2000). Working professional as part-time online learners. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2). Retrieved August 11, 2010 from http://www.sloanconsortium.org/conference/proceedings/1999Summer/papers/99summer_hislop2.pdf.
• Holmes, B., & Gardner, J. (2006). E-learning: Concepts and practice. London: Sage Publications.
• Hong, K. S., Lai, K. W., & Holton, D. (2003). Students' satisfaction and perceived learning with a web-based course. Educational Technology & Society, 6(1), 116-124.
• Hong, K. S., Ridzuan, A. A., & Kuek, M. K. (2003). Students' attitudes toward the use of the Internet for learning: A study at a university in Malaysia. Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 45-49.
• Horton, W. (2000). Designing web based training. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Horzum, M. B. (2011). Web pedagojik içerik bilgisi ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İlköğretim Online, 10(1), 257-272.
• Howland, J. L., & Moore, J. L. (2002). Student perceptions as distance learner in Internet based courses. Distance Education, 23(2), 183-195.
• Internet World Stats (2009). Internet world stats: Usage and population statistics. Retrieved December 14, 2011 from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.
• Johnston, J., Killion, J., & Oomen, J. (2005). Student satisfaction in the virtual classroom. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 3(2), 1-7. Retrieved 18 August, 2009, from http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/vol3num2/johnston.pdf.
• Jung, I., Seonghee, C., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effect of different type of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in web based instruction. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 39(2), 153-162.
• Kai-Ming, L., Yiu-Sing, L., Pak-Hung, L., & Kwok-Leung, W. (2002). Enhancing pre-service teachers? Learning about on-line learning through use of a self-managed on-line learning environment, International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE'02). Retrieved August 18, 2010, from http://www.computer.org/plugins/dl/pdf /proceedings/icce/2002/1509/00/15091051.pdf
• Kearsley, G. (2000). Online education: Learning and teaching in cyberspace. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.
• Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the world wide web. Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 38(1), 1-21.
• Lee, M. H., Tsai, C. C., & Chang, C. (2008). Exploring teachers’ self-efficacy toward the web pedagogical content knowledge in taiwan. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City. Retrieved August 18, 2010, from www.ntnu.edu.tw/acad/docmeet/97/a2/a201-1.doc.
• Lim, D. H., Morris, M. L., & Kupritz, V. W. (2006). Online vs. blended learning: Differences in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development International Conference (AHRD) (Columbus, OH, Feb 22-26, 2006), 809-816 (Symp. 39-1) ERIC Document Reproduction Service (ED492755).
• Luan, W. S., Fung, N. S., Nawawi, M., & Hong, T. S. (2005). Experienced and inexperienced Internet users among pre-service teachers: Their use and attitudes toward the internet. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 90-103.
• Lubans, J. (2000). Key findings on internet use among students. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://www.lubans.org/docs/key/key.html.
• Lynch, M. M. (2002). The online educator: a guide to creating the virtual classroom. London: Routledge Falmer Taylor & Francis group.
• Manathunga, C. (2002). Designing online learning modules: An Australian example in teacher education. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 185-195.
• Manuel, K. (2001). Teaching an online information literacy course. Reference Services Review, 29(3), 219-228.
• Matuga, J. M. (2001). Electronic pedagogical practice: The art and science of teaching and learning online. Educational Technology & Society, 4(3), 77-84.
• Mellema, H. N., Smart, K. L., Shull, C. M., & Salmona, M. (2009). Blended learning and user satisfaction. Issues in Information Systems, X(1), 126-130.
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2007). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK): Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 2214-2226). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved August 18, 2010, from http://www.editlib.org/p/24919.
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108(6), 1017-1054.
• Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). The song remains the same: Looking back to the future of educational technology. Tech Trends, 53(5), 48-53.
• Mitra, A., & Steffensmeier, T. (2000). Changes in student attitudes and student computer use in a computer-enriched environment. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 32(3), 417-433.
• Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, I. G. (1996). Distance education: a systems view. New York: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
• Motiwalla, L., & Tello, S. (2000). Distance learning on the Internet: An exploratory study. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(4), 253-264.
• Ocker, R. J., & Yaverbaum, G. J. (2004). Collaborative learning environments: Exploring student attitudes and satisfaction in face-to-face and asynchronous computer conferencing settings. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(4), 427-448.
• Oliver, R., & Omari, A. (2001).Student responses to collaborating and learning in a web-based environment. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 17(1), 34-47.
• Ostiguy, N., & Haffer, A. (2001). Assessing differences in instructional methods: Uncovering how students learn best. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30(6), 370-374.
• Richardson, J. T. E., & Price, L. (2003). Approaches to studying and perceptions of academic quality in electronically delivered courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 45-56.
• Ryan, R. C. (2000). Student assessment comparison of lecture and online construction equipment and methods classes. T.H.E. Journal, 27(5). Retrieved August 11, 2010 from http://thejournal.com/ Articles/2000/01/01/Student-Assessment-Comparison-of-Lecture-and-Online-Construction-Equipment-and-Methods-Classes.aspx?sc_lang= en&Page=1
• Scherer, K. (1997). College life on-line: Healthy and unhealthy internet use. Journal of College Student Development, 38(6), 655-665.
• Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Shin, T. (2009b, March). Examining preservice teachers’ development of technological pedagogical content knowledge in an introductory instructional technology course. Paper presented at the 2009 International Conference of the Society for the Information and Technology & Teacher Education. March 2-6, Charleston, South Carolina.
• Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Koehler, M J., Shin, T., & Mishra, P. (2009a, April). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Paper presented at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. April 13-17, San Diego, California.
• Schlosser, L. A. & Simonson, M. (2002). Distance education: Definition and glossary of terms. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://itde.nova.edu/~simsmich/jan%2024.pdf.
• Sener, J., & Stover, M. S. (2000). Integrating ALN into an independent study distance education program: NVCC case studies. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2). Retrieved August 11, 2010 from http://www.sloan-c.org/jaln/v4n2/integrating-aln-independent-study-distance-education-program-nvcc-case-studies.
• Serban, A. M. (2000). Evaluation of fall 1999 online courses. Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED453868.pdf.
• Shapely, P. (1999). On-line education to develop complex reasoning skills in organic chemistry. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(3). Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.132.9324& rep=rep1&type =pdf
• Shin, T., Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P. Schmidt, D., Baran, E., & Thompson, A. (2009, March). Changing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through course experiences. Paper presented at the 2009 International Conference of the Society for the Information and Technology & Teacher Education. March 2-6, Charleston, South Carolina.
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
• Simonson, M., & Schlosser, C. (1995). More than fiber: Distance education in Iowa. Tech Trends, 40(3), 13-15.
• Simonson M. (1999). Equivalency theory and distance education: Readings in distance education. Retrieved August 16, 2010, from http://fcae.nova.edu/pet/simonson/ monograph.PDF.
• Simonson, M., Schlosser, C., & Hanson, D. (1999). Theory and distance education: A new discussion. The American Journal of Distance Education. 13(1), 60-75.
• Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M. & Zvacek, S. (2006). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education, (Third Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, USA.
• Stein, D. S., & Wanstreet, C. E. (2003). Role of social presence, choice of online or face-to-face group format, and satisfaction with perceived knowledge gained in a distance learning environment. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, October 8-10, 2003.
• Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000).Building knowledge building communities: Consistencies, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359-383.
• Verduin J. R., & Clark, T. A. (1994). Uzaktan eğitim: etkin uygulama esasları, Çev: İlknur Maviş, Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Basımevi.
• Wegner, S., Holloway, K. C., & Garton, E. M. (1999). The effects of Internet-based instruction on student learning. The Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 3(2), 98–106. Retrieved August 16, 2010, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.107.7641 &rep=rep1&type=pdf