Pandemi Sırasında Öğrencilerin, Öğretmenlerin ve Velilerin Çevrimiçi Öğretime Yönelik Algılanan Memnuniyeti

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 527 - 550, 29.12.2022

Avdhesh Jha , Azamat Maksüdünov , Logaıswarı Indıran , Parinita Ratnaparkhi

https://doi.org/10.47097/piar.1201181

Abstract

Çalışma, COVID-19 pandemisinin etkileri çerçevesinde
çevrimiçi öğretim faaliyetlerini kullanıcıların memnuniyeti
açısından incelemektedir. Çevrimiçi öğretim, pandemi
nedeniyle birçok ülkede ve eğitim sisteminde daha da yaygın
bir şekilde kullanılmaya başlayan, öğretmenler, öğrenciler ve
ebeveynleri için çeşitli zorlukları beraberinde getiren
geleneksel öğretim sistemine karşı yeni ve farklı bir
alternatiftir. Bu çerçevede, çalışmanın temel amacı,
öğretmenlerin, öğrencilerin ve velilerin çevrimiçi
öğretimden memnuniyet düzeyini, avantajlı yönleri ve
zorluklarına ilişkin algılarını ortaya koymaktır. Çalışmanın
bulguları, çevrimiçi öğretimden memnuniyet ile öğretmen,
veli ve öğrencilerin algılarında cinsiyete göre farklılık
olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Çevrimiçi öğretimin yararları
ve zorluklarının yanı sıra, bu çalışma aynı zamanda
öğretmenlerin, teknolojiyle ilgili olan çevrimiçi öğrenmede
yaşanan zorluklarla ilgili algılarını da ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

Memnuniyet, Öğretim, Çevrimiçi Öğretim, Pandemi, COVID-19

Perceived Satisfaction of Students, Teachers, and Parents During the Pandemic Towards Online Teaching

Abstract

With the concepts of online teaching, the study examines
online teaching in light of the COVID 19 pandemic effects.
Online teaching is a new and different alternative to
traditional teaching which was enforced by most
governments and education systems in several developing
countries due to the pandemic, which in turn raised several
questions for teachers, students, and their parents. To this
end, the study's primary goal was to learn about the
perception of teachers as well as students and parents
regarding the satisfaction, merit, and challenges of online
teaching. Teachers, students, and parents were all polled in
this study. The findings of this study revealed that there is a
difference in satisfaction with online teaching, as well as the
perceptions of teachers, parents, and students, depending on
gender. Along with the merits and challenges of online
teaching the current study also examines the perceptions of
teachers regarding the difficulties associated with online
learning, which in major cases was related to the technology.

Keywords

Satisfaction, Teaching, Online Teaching, COVID-19, Pandemic

References

• Bergman, J., & Sams, J. (2012). Flip y our classroom: Reach every student in every c lass every day. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
• Blumenstyk, G. (2015). American higher education in crisis: What everyone needs to know? Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
• Cheng, J., & Koszalka, T. (2016). Cognitive flexibility theory and its application to learning resources. Retrieved from http://ridlr.syr.edu/publications/
• Harsasi, M., & Sutawijaya, A. (2018). Determinants of student satisfaction in online tutorial: A study of a distance education institution. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 89-99. doi: https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.382732
• Hofer, S. I., Nistor, N., & Scheibenzuber, C. (2021). Online teaching and learning in higher education: Lessons learned in crisis situations. Computers in Human Behavior, 121, 106789.
• Ilgaz, H., & Gülbahar, Y. (2015). A snapshot of online learners: e-Readiness, e-Satisfaction and expectations. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2), 171-187.
• Kirtman, L. (2009). Online versus in-class courses: An examination of differences in learning outcomes. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 103-116.
• Kurucay, M., & Inan, F. A. (2017). Examining the effects of learner-learner interactions on satisfaction and learning in an online undergraduate course. Computers & Education, 115, 20-37.
• Liguori E, Winkler C. (2020) From offline to online: Challenges and opportunities for entrepreneurship education following the COVID-19 pandemic. Entrepreneurship Educ Pedagogy., 3(4):346-51. doi: 10.1177/2515127420916738.
• Lister, M. (2014). Trends in the design of e-learning and online learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(4), 671-680.
• Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009.
• Muilenburg, L. Y. & Zane, L. B. (2007). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education, 26(1) 29-48.
• Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Parahoo, S. K., Santally, M. I., Rajabalee, Y., & Harvey, H. L. (2016). Designing a predictive model of student satisfaction in online learning. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 26(1), 1-19. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2015.1083511
• Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia: Explorations in high technology (pp. 163–205). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Spiro R. J., Coulson R. L., Feltovich P. J. and Anderson D. K. (1988) Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Paper presented at the tenth annual conference of the cognitive science society. Hilldale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
• Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp.57-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
• Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Gaunt, A., Hu, Y., Klautke, H., Cheng, C., Clemente, I., Leahy, S. and Ward, P. (2019). Cognitive Flexibility Theory and the accelerated development of adaptive readiness and adaptive response to novelty. In P. Ward, J. Schraagen, J. Gore, & E. Roth (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of expertise (pp. 951–976). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Spiro, R. J., Klautke, H. A., Cheng, C., & Gaunt, A. (2017). Cognitive fexibility theory and the assessment of 21st-century skills. In C. Secolsky & D. B. Denison (Eds.), Handbook on measurement, assessment, and evaluation in higher education (pp. 631–637). NY: Routledge
• Spiro, R., Vispoel, W., Schmitz, J., Samaragungavan, A., & Boerger, A. (1987). Knowledge acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains. In B. K. Britton & S. M. Glynn (Eds.), Executive control processes in reading (pp. 177–199). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Tallent-Runnels M.K., Thomas J.A., Lan W.Y., Cooper S., Ahern T.C., Shaw S.M. & Liu X. (2006). Teaching courses online: a review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76, 93–135.
• Tibi, M. H. (2015). Improving collaborative skills by computer science students through structured discussion forums. Journal of Technologies in Education, 10 (3-4), 27-41. doi:10.24059/olj.v22i1.995
• Turhangil Erenler, H. H. (2019). A structural equation model to evaluate students' learning and satisfaction. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 28(2), 254-267. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22189
• Uusiautti, S., Maatta, K., & Leskisenoja, E. (2017). Succeeding Alone and Together-University Students' Perceptions of Caring Online Teaching. Journal of Studies in Education, 7(2), 48-66. doi: https:// doi.org/10.5296/jse.v7i2.11162
• Wang, C., Cheng, Z., Yue, X. G., & McAleer, M. (2020). Risk management of COVID-19 by universities in China. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(2), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13020036
• Young, A., & Norgard, C. (2006). Assessing the quality of online courses from the students' perspective. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 107-115. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.001