Çevrimiçi Öğrenmede Öğrenci Özerkliği: Ölçek Geliştirilmesi ve Doğrulanması

Year 2023, , 116 - 125, 30.04.2023

Gülgün Afacan Adanır , Yasemin Gülbahar Güven

https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1152249

Abstract

Çevrimiçi öğrenmede, özerklik akademik başarı için önemli faktörlerden biridir ve öğrenenlerin kendi becerilerinin farkında olmaları
akademik performans üzerinde etkilidir. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmanın amacı, çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamlarında öğrenen özerkliğinin
değerlendirilmesi için geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Hem mevcut literatüre hem de çevrimiçi öğrenme alanındaki
uzmanların algılarına dayalı olarak bir madde havuzu oluşturulmuştur. Araştırmanın örneklemini çevrimiçi ders alan 903 üniversite
öğrencisi oluşturmuştur. Çalışma, ölçeğin dört boyut altında 28 maddeden oluştuğunu ortaya koymuştur: öz kontrol, öz yansıtma, öz
etkileşim ve öz motivasyon. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, maddelerin çalışma tarafından tanımlanan faktörlere uygun şekilde yüklendiğini
kanıtlamıştır. Bu bulgulara dayalı olarak öğrenen özerkliği ölçeğinin çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamlarında var olan öğrenen özerkliğini ölçmede
kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğu görülmüştür

Keywords

öğrenen özerkliği, çevrimiçi öğrenen, çevrimiçi öğrenme, ölçek geliştirme

Learner Autonomy in Online Learning: Development and Validation of a Scale

Abstract

In online learning, autonomy is one of the significant factors for academic success, and learners’ being aware of her/his skills can have
effect on academic performance. Hence, the purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable measurement scale for the evaluation
of learner autonomy in online learning environments. An item pool was generated based on both existing literature and perceptions of
experts in the field of online learning. The sample of the study consisted of 903 university learners taking online courses. The study revealed
that the scale consists of 28 items under four dimensions: self-control, self-reflection, self-interaction, and self-motivation. Confirmatory
factor analysis proved that the items were appropriately loaded into the factors defined by the study. Based on these findings, the learner
autonomy scale was found to be a valid and reliable instrument that may be employed in measuring learners’ autonomy which exist in
online learning environments.

Keywords

learner autonomy, online learner, online learning, scale development

References

• Alqurashi, E. (2016). Self-efficacy in online learning environments: A literature review. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 9(1), 45-52. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v9i1.9549
• Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2), 1-13. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/708
• Arkorful, V., & Abaidoo, N. (2015). The role of e-learning, advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 12(1), 29-42. https://itdl.org/Journal/Jan_15/Jan15.pdf
• Bei, E., Mavroidis, I., & Giossos, Y. (2020). Development of a scale for measuring the learner autonomy of distance education students. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 22(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2019-0015
• Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language teaching, 40(1), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003958
• Carpenter, S. (2018). Ten steps in scale development and reporting: A guide for researchers. Communication Methods and Measures, 12(1), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2017.1396583
• Chang, B. (2019). Reflection in learning. Online Learning, 23(1), 95-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1447
• Cho, M.-H., & Shen, D. (2013). Self-regulation in online learning. Distance education, 34(3), 290-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835770
• Choi, J., Walters, A., & Hoge, P. (2017). Self-reflection and math performance in an online learning environment. Online Learning Journal, 21(4), 79-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1249
• Ciel Language Support Network. (2000). Integrating independent learning with the curriculum. LLAS Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, University of Southampton. http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/gpg/1400
• Dang, T. T. (2010). Learner autonomy in EFL studies in Vietnam: A discussion from a sociocultural perspective. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n2p3
• Dang, T. T. (2012). Learner autonomy: A synthesis of theory and practice. The Internet Journal of Language, Culture and Society, 35(1), 52-67. https://aaref.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/35-08.pdf
• Davis, N. L., Gough, M., & Taylor, L. L. (2019). Online teaching: advantages, obstacles and tools for getting it right. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 19(3), 256-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2019.1612313
• DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Vol. 26). Sage.
• Dickinson, L. (1994). Learner autonomy: What, why, and how. In W. J. Leffa (Ed.), Autonomy in language learning (pp. 2-12) . Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Su.
• Dietrich, N., Kentheswaran, K., Ahmadi, A., Teychené, J., Bessière, Y., Alfenore, S., Laborie, S., Bastoul, D., Loubière, K., Guigui, C., Sperandio, M., Barna, L., Paul, E., Cabassud, C., Liné, A., & Hébrard, G. (2020). Attempts, successes, and failures of distance learning in the time of COVID-19. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9), 2448-2457. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00717
• Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/1744
• Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock ’n’ roll) (3rd ed.). Sage.
• Firat, M. (2016). Measuring the e-learning autonomy of distance education students. Open Praxis, 8(3), 191-201. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.3.310
• Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G. (2001). Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 21(7), 516-525. https://doi.org/10.1054/nedt.2001.0589
• Fotiadou, A., Angelaki, C., & Mavroidis, I. (2017). Learner autonomy as a factor of the learning process in distance education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 20(1), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1515/eurodl-2017-0006Gu, P., & Lee, Y. (2019). Promoting students’ motivation and use of SRL strategies in the web-based mathematics learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(3), 391-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239518808522
• Guglielmino, L. M. (1977). Development of the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Georgia.
• Hannafin, M. J. (1984). Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02905753
• Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Pergamon.
• Hung, M.-L., Chou, C., Chen, C.-H., & Own, Z.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1080-1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004
• Hutapea, N. M. (2019). Improving senior high school students learning autonomy through generative learning. Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(1), 84-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.31258/jes.3.1.p.84-95
• Hutcheson, G., & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist. Sage.
• Joshi, K. (2011). Learner perceptions and teacher beliefs about learner autonomy in language learning. Journal of NELTA, 16(1-2), 12-29. https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v16i1-2.6126
• Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23(3), 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289233
• Kırtık, B. (2017). Are Turkish university students autonomous or not. Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology, 2(1), 1-23. https://www.jflet.com/articles/are-turkish-university-students-autonomous-or-not.pdf
• Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• LaTour, K. A., & Noel, H. N. (2021). Self-directed learning online: An opportunity to binge. Journal of Marketing Education. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475320987295
• Lomax, R. G. (2010). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.189
• Macaskill, A., & Taylor, E. (2010). The development of a brief measure of learner autonomy in university students. Studies in Higher Education, 35(3), 351-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903502703
• Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
• Mayer, R. E. (2019). Thirty years of research on online learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(2), 152-159. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3482
• Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22-38). Routledge.
• Mulyono, D. (2017). The influence of learning model and learning independence on mathematics learning outcomes by controlling students’ early ability. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(3), 689-708. https://www.iejme.com/article/the-influence-of-learning-model-and-learning-independence-on-mathematics-learning-outcomes-by
• Oxford, R. (2003). Toward a more systematic model of L2 learner autonomy. In D. Palfreyman & R. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives (pp. 75-91). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Oxford, R. L. (2015). Expanded perspectives on autonomous learners. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 58-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2014.995765
• Özel, M., Timur, B., Timur, S., & Bilen, K. (2013). Öğretim elemanlarının pedagojik alan bilgilerini değerlendirme anketinin Türkçeye uyarlanması çalışması. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 14(1), 407-428.
• Panadero, E. (2011). Instructional help for self-assessment and self-regulation: Evaluation of the efficacy of self-assessment scripts vs. rubrics [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain.
• Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate?: Review of Zimmerman‟ s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de psicologia, 30(2), 450-462. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.2.167221
• Pintrich, P. R. (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich (Ed.), Understanding Self-regulated Learning (pp. 3-12). Jossey-Bass.
• Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2011). Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement and generation of interest. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 168-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.587723
• Serdyukova, N., & Serdyukov, P. (2013). Student Autonomy in Online Learning. In O. Foley, M. T. Restivo, J. Uhomoibhi, & M. Helfert (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU) (pp. 229-233). Science and Technology Publications. https://doi.org/10.5220/0004353102290233
• Shen, D., Cho, M.-H., Tsai, C.-L., & Marra, R. (2013). Unpacking online learning experiences: Online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.04.001
• Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
• Sumbawati, M. S., Basuki, I., Ismayati, E., & Rijanto, T. (2020). Student Learning Independence in Online Learning Depends on Motivation. In A Maniçoba De Oliveira, H. Susanto, Prof. Madlazim, E. Yundra, S. Muslim, E. Susantini, S. E. Cahyaningrum, Prof. Tukiran, & E. M. Imah (Eds.), International Joint Conference on Science and Engineering (IJCSE 2020) (pp. 342-347). Atlantis Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/aer.k.201124.062
• Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
• Taherdoost, H. (2016, April 10). Sampling methods in research methodology; how to choose a sampling technique for research. How to Choose a Sampling Technique for Research. SSRN. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035
• Tang, Y., & Tseng, H. W. (2013). Distance learners’ self-efficacy and information literacy skills. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(6), 517-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.08.008
• Tassinari, M. G. (2012). Evaluating learner autonomy: A dynamic model with descriptors. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 3(1), 24-40. https://sisaljournal.org/archives/march12/tassinari/
• Tsai, M.-J. (2009). The model of strategic e-learning: Understanding and evaluating student e-learning from metacognitive perspectives. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 34-48. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r0wQqix9FFzPm91vUgJPGtfKb41_VoN_/view
• Tsai, Y.-R. (2019). Promotion of learner autonomy within the framework of a flipped EFL instructional model: perception and perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1650779
• Walker, S. L., & Fraser, B. J. (2005). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing distance education learning environments in higher education: The Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES). Learning Environments Research, 8(3), 289-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-005-1568-3
• Weinstein, C. E. (1987). Fostering learning autonomy through the use of learning strategies. Journal of reading, 30(7), 590-595.
• Wong, J., Baars, M., Davis, D., Van Der Zee, T., Houben, G. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Supporting self-regulated learning in online learning environments and MOOCs: A systematic review. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(4-5), 356-373. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1543084
• Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806-838. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0011000006288127
• Zhong, Q. M. (2018). The evolution of learner autonomy in online environments: A case study in a New Zealand context. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 9(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.37237/090106
• Zhu, Y., Au, W., & Yates, G. (2016). University students’ self-control and self-regulated learning in a blended course. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 54-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.04.001
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-40). Academic Press.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 49-64). Routledge.
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 299-315). Routledge.