An Evaluation of Online Science Classes Based on Students’ Science Learning Experiences

Year 2023, , 705 - 722, 21.10.2023

Hülya Aslan Efe

https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.1341206

Abstract

Online science courses have become increasingly popular due to their accessibility and convenience. Consequently, evaluating their quality is essential for ensuring students receive a rigorous and valuable education. This study investigates the effectiveness of online science classes in terms of student- faculty interaction, time on task, active learning and cooperation among students by considering the participant students' experiences and their evaluations of online science courses. The participants were 2034 students from different middle (year 5 to 8) and high schools (year 9 to 12) during 2022-2023 academic year. All of the participants attended online science classes from 2nd half term of 2019-20 and whole school year of 2020-21. The data was collected by using the Student Evaluation of Online Teaching Effectiveness (SEOTE) scale, which was developed by Bangart (2005). The student responses were evaluated based on their school year, frequency of attendance, and means used to access online science classes. The findings of the study revealed that the participant students were not satisfied with online science learning experiences in terms of faculty-student interaction, time on task, cooperation among students and active learning practices. The study also found that faculty-student interaction, time on task, cooperation among students were important predictor of active learning for online science learning practices. Based on the findings the study suggests that when designing or implementing online science classes, students’ engagement, teacher-faculty interaction, creating opportunities for students to cooperate and helping students to actively engage in the activities should be taken into consideration by teachers.

Keywords

Online science teaching, evaluation, active learning, students’ experiences

References

• Agustina, E. & Cahyono, B. (2017). Perceptions of Indonesian teachers and students on the use of quipper school as an online platform for extended efl learning. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. 8, 794. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0804.20.
• Al Rawashdeh, A. Z., Mohammed, E.Y., Al Arab, A.R., Alara, M. & Al-Rawashdeh, B. (2021). Advantages and disadvantages of using e-learning in university education: Analyzing students’ perspectives. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 19(2), 107-117.
• Anshari, M. & Almunawar, M. N., Shahrill, M., Wicaksono, D. & Huda, M. (2017). Smartphones usage in the classrooms: Learning aid or interference? Education and Information Technologies. 22, 3063-3079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9572-7.
• Bakioğlu, B. & Çevik, M. (2020). Science teachers’ views on distance education in the covid-19 pandemic process. Turkish Studies, 15(4), 109-129.
• Bangert, A. W. (2005). Identifying factors underlying the quality of online teaching effectiveness: An exploratory study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 17(2), 79-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03032699
• Barrot, J. S., Llenares, I. I., & Del Rosario, L. S. (2021). Students' online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7321-7338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10589-x.
• Barton, D.C. (2020). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on field instruction and remote teaching alternatives: Results from a survey of instructors, Ecology and Evolution, 10, 12499-12507.
• Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289.
• Brinkley-Etzkorn, K.E. (2018). Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens, The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.004
• Cheung, L. & Kan, A. (2002). Evaluation of factors related to student performance in a distance-learning business communication course. The Journal of Education for Business. 77, 257-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599674.
• Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
• Cook D. A. (2007). Web-based learning: pros, cons and controversies. Clinical medicine (London, England), 7(1), 37-42. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-37.
• Cortázar, C., Nussbaum, M., Harcha, J., Alvares, D., López, F., Goñi, J.& Cabezas, V. (2021) Promoting critical thinking in an online, project-based course. Comput Human Behav. 119.
• Çoban, M. (2020). The experiences of the prospective information technology teachers taking the multimedia design and production course with project-based learning method: A case study. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8 (16), 720-737. http://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.758956
• Dalton, M. (2021). Georgia educators identify problems associated with teaching during a pandemic, Retrieved from http://wabe.org/ga-educators-identify-problems-associated-with-teaching-during-a-pandemic/
• Dolgunsoz, E. & Yildirim, G. (2021). The role of mobile devices on online efl skill courses during covid-19 emergency remote education, acuity: Journal of English language pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. 6 (2), 118-131.
• Dziuban, C.D., Picciano, A.G., Graham, C.R. & Moskal, P.D. (2016). Conducting research in online and blended learning environments: New pedagogical frontiers. New York: Routledge
• Faja, S. (2013). Collaborative learning in online courses: exploring students’ perceptions, Information Systems Educational Journal (ISEDJ), 11(3), 42-51.
• Garcia-Mendoza, G.A. (2014). A comparative study of computer and mobile phone-mediated collaboration: The case of university students in Japan. Mobile learning applications in higher education. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC). 11(1), 222-237. http://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v11i1.1898
• Gamage, K. A. A., & Perera, E. (2021). Undergraduate students’ device preferences in the transition to online learning. Social Sciences, 10(8), 288.
• Ganesh, G., Paswan, A. & Sun, Q. (2015). Are face-to-face classes more effective than online classes? An empirical examination. Marketing Education Review, 25(2), 67-81.
• Graham, C., Woodfield, W. & Harrison, J. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education. 18. 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003.
• Hoic-Bozic, N., Holenko Dlab, M., & Mornar, V. (2016). Recommender system and web 2.0 tools to enhance a blended learning model. IEEE Transactions on Education, 59(1), 39-44.
• Hollister, B., Nair, P., Hill-Lindsay, S. & Chukoskie, L. (2022). Engagement in online learning: student attitudes and behavior during covid-19. Front. Educ. 7, 851019.
• Hong, J. C., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., & Zhao, L. (2021). High school students' online learning ineffectiveness in experimental courses during the covid-19 pandemic. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 738695.
• Hsu, J. L., Rowland-Goldsmith, M., & Schwartz, E. B. (2022). Student motivations and barriers toward online and in-person office hours in stem courses. CBE Life Sciences Education, 21(4), ar68. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-03-0048
• Humphrey, E.A. & Wiles, J.R. (2021). Lessons learned through listening to biology students during a transition to online learning in wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, Ecology and Evolution, 11, 3450- 3458.
• Kenar, I., Balci, M. & Gokalp, M.S. (2013). The effects of tablet computer assisted instruction on students’ attitude toward science and technology course, International Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(3), 163-171, http://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2013.11890074
• Kleiman, G. (2004). Meeting the need for high quality teachers: e-learning solutions. U.S. Department of Education Secretary’s No Child Left Behind Leadership Summit, Increasing Options Through e-Learning, White Paper, Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC).
• Korkmaz, G. & Toraman, Ç. (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 293-309.
• Kulal, A., & Nayak, A. (2020). A study on perception of teachers and students toward online classes in Dakshina Kannada and Udupi District. Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J. 15, 285–296.
• Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K., & Hewson, P. (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of the standards. National Institute for Science Education (NISE News Brief), 1(1), 1-6.
• Lu, C., & Cutumisu, M. (2022). Online engagement and performance on formative assessments mediate the relationship between attendance and course performance. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 2.
• Mather, M. & Sarkans, A. (2018). Student perceptions of online and face-to-face learning, International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 10(2), 61–76.
• Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M. &Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Center for Technology in Learning. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
• Miller, K. (2008). Teaching science methods online: Myths about inquiry- based online learning, Science Education, 17(2), 80-86. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.110
• Muthuprasad, T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K.S., Girish, K. Jha (2021). Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID -19 pandemic, Social Sciences & Humanities, 3 (1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100101.
• Noesgaard, S.S. & Orngreen, R. (2015). The effectiveness of e-learning: an exploration and integrative review of the definitions, methodologies and factors that promote e-learning effectiveness, The electronic Journal of E-Learning, 13(4), 278-290.
• Ozamiz-Etxebarria, N., Berasategi-Santxo, N., Idoiaga-Mondragon, N., & Dosil-Santamaría, M. (2021). The psychological state of teachers during the covid-19 crisis: The challenge of returning to face-to-face teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–10.
• Paul, J. & Jefferson, F. (2019). A comparative analysis of student performance in an online vs. Face-to-face environmental science course from 2009 to 2016. Front. Comput. Sci. 1-9.
• Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L. & Koole, M. (2020). Online university teaching during and after the covid-19 crisis: refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigit Sci Educ, 2, 923-945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y.
• Rotar, O. (2022). Online student support: a framework for embedding support interventions into the online learning cycle. RPTEL, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-021-00178-4
• Selvaraj, A., Vishnub, R., KA, Benson, N. & Mathew, A.J. (2021). Effect of pandemic based online education on teaching and learning system, International Journal of Educational Development 85,102444, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102444
• Singh, S. & Arya, A.A. (2020). A hybrid flipped- classroom approach for online teaching of biochemistry in developing countries during Covid-19 crisis, Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 48, 502-503. https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fbmb.21418
• Singh, S., Steele, K., & Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face to face learning: hybrid and blended learning approach for covid-19, post vaccine & post-pandemic world, Journal of Educational Technology and Systems, 50(2), 140-171.
• Suárez, A., Specht, M., Prinsen, F., Kalz, M., & Ternier, S. (2018). A review of the types of mobile activities in mobile inquiry-based learning. Computers and Education, 118, 38-55.
• Tal, H. M. & Kurtz, G. (2015). The laptop, the tablet, and the smartphone attend lectures. In J. Keengwe (Ed.), Promoting Active Learning through the Integration of Mobile and Ubiquitous Technologies (pp. 183-193). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6343-5.ch011.
• UNESCO. (2020). Education: From disruption to recovery. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
• Widiyatmoko, A. (2018). The effectiveness of simulation in science learning on conceptual understanding: A literature review. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 24 (1/2), 35-43.
• Yao, J., Rao, J., Jiang, T., & Xiong, C. (2020). What role should teachers play in online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic? Evidence from China. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 5(2), 517-524.
• Yüksel, A. O. (2022). Investigation of preservice science teachers’ learning experiences on educational robotics applications. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 10 (19), 50-72. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1012635