Learner Views about a Distance Education Course

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate the views of learners experienced in the Distance Learning Platform (DLP), which was prepared according to an online course design model. The participants of the study were 19 learners who took the programming languages course (via the DLP for 14 weeks). Before the application, the preparation of the DLP took nearly 500 hours. A pilot study was performed with the learners during the summer school. The design of the DLP was improved through the views of those learners. The data were obtained through face-to-face interviews with the learners. The following themes emerged from analysis of the data: factors in preferring the DLP, general characteristics of the DLP, the effectiveness of the DLP, and expansion of the DLP. These themes are further analyzed on the basis of “Diffusion of Innovations” and “Uses and Gratifications” theories. As a result of the interviews conducted with the learners, it was found that the learners had positive opinions about the DLP as it (1) offers flexibility, (2) contains elements enhancing their motivation, (3) enables the learners to communicate easily with the instructor, (4) provides the learners with instant feedback, and (5) enables them to access to the course materials easily.

Keywords

• Distance education, Online learning, Instructional design model, Programming language, Learner views, Course evaluation

Kaynakça

1. Alexander, M.W., Truell, A.D. & Zhao, J.J. (2012). Expected advantages and disadvantages of onlıne learning: Perceptions from college students who have not taken online courses. Issues in Information Systems, 13(2), 193-200.
2. Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Wellesley MA: Babson College/Quahog Research Group.
3. Ally, M. (2004). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 3-31). Athabasca, Alberta, Canada: Athabasca University.
4. Aly, İ. (2013). Performance in an online introductory managerial accounting course in a classroom setting. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(2), 85-99.
5. Anderson, B. & Simpson, M. (2012). History and heritage in distance education. Journal of Open, Flexible, and Distance Learning, 16(2), 1-10.
6. Bandiera, O., Larcinese, V., & Rasul, I. (2010). Heterogeneous class size effects: New evidence from a panel of university students. The Economic Journal, 120(549), 1365-1398
7. Bernard, R.M., Abrami, P.C., Lou, Y. Borokhovski, E., Wade, A. Wozney, L., Wallet, P.A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare to classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.
8. Berger, J. I. (2005). Perceived consequences of adopting the Internet into adult literacy and basic education classrooms. Adult Basic Education, 15(2), 103-121.

9. Bills, D.P & Biles, J.A. (2005). The role of programming in IT. SIGITE'05 Conference (pp. 43-49). Newark, New Jersey.
10. Borthick, A. F. & Jones, D. R. (2000). The motivation for collaborative discovery learning online and its application in an information systems assurance course. Issues in Accounting Education, 15(2), 181-210.
11. Bouhnik, D. & Marcus, T. (2006). Interaction in distance-learning courses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 299-305.
12. Cavus, N. (2007). Assessing the success rate of students using a learning management system together with a collaborative tool in web -based teaching of programming languages. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(3), 301-321.
13. Cavus, N. & Ibrahim, D. (2009). mLearning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 78-91.
14. Cavus, N., Uzunboylu, H., & Ibrahim, D. (2007). Assessing the success of students using a learning management system and together with a collaborative tool in web-based teaching of programming languages. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(3), 301-321.
15. Chaleunvong, K. (2009). Data collection techniques. Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.gfmer.ch/Activites_ internationales _Fr/Laos/Data_collection_tecniques_Chaleunvong_Laos_2009.htm
16. Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
17. Daymount, T. & Blau, G. (2008). Student performance in online and traditional sections of an undergraduate management course. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9(3), 275-294.
18. Diaz, D. P. (2002). Online drop rates revisited. The technology source (Online). Retrieved on 8 September 2015 from http://technologysource.org/article/online_drop_rates_ revisited/
19. Driscoll, A., Jicha, K., Hunt, A.N., Tichavsky, L., & Thompson, G. (2012). Can online courses deliver in-class results? A comparison of student performance and satisfaction in an online versus a face-to-face introductory sociology course. Teaching Sociology, 40(4), 312-331.
20. Dutton, J., Dutton, M., & Perry, J. (1999). Do online students perform as well as lecture students? Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 131-139
21. Farag, W. (2012). Comparing achievement of intended learning outcomes in online programming classes with bl. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Mount Royal University.
22. Feintuch, H. (2010). Keeping their distance: New study indicates students perform better online. Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 27(3), 20.
23. Fraenkel JR. Wallen NE. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
24. Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners dropout. Workforce, 10, 53-63.
25. Friday, E., Friday-Stroud, S. S., Green, A. L., & Hill. A. Y. (2006). A multi-semester comparison of student performance between multiple traditional and online sections of two management courses. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 8(1), 66-81.
26. Gagne, 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.
27. Gunawardena, C. N. & McIsaac, M. S. (2004). Distance education. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp.355-396). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
28. Gulbahar, Y. (2009). e-ogrenme. Ankara: Pegem.
29. Hastie, M., Hung, I-C., Chen, N-S., & Kinshuk (2010). A blended synchronous learning model for educational international collaboration. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(1), 9-24.
30. Hetzner S., Leen, E. (2013). Personalisation and tutoring in e-Learning – The key for success in learning in later life. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 17(1). Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=special&sp =articles&inum=5&article=626
31. Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The virtual classroom: Learning without limits via computer networks. Norwood NJ: Ablex.
32. Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). Education goes digital: The evolution of online learning and the revolution in higher education. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 59-64.
33. Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31(4), 51-55.
34. Huh, S., Yoo, S., Jin, J., & Lee, K.. (2008). Comparisons of performances between online learners and offline learners across different types of tests. Academy of Information and Management Sciences Journal, 11(1), 45-63.
35. Jaggars, S. S. & Bailey, T. (2010) Effectiveness of fully online courses for college students: Response to a Department of Education meta-analysis. Teachers College, Columbia University, Community College Research Center. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.icde.org/filestore/News/2004-2010/2010/ResponcetoaDept. ofEducationUSAMeta-Analysis.pdf.
36. James, G. (2002). Advantages and disadvantages of online learning. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wbts/nieuw_basics/addis.pdf.
37. Johnson, L., Adams, S., and Cummins, M.(2012). The NMC Horizon report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: TheNew MediaConsortium. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2012-horizon-report-HE.pdf (12.01.2013)
38. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., and Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 Horizon report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/hr2011.pdf.
39. Jones, K. T., & Chen, C. C. (2008). Blended learning in a graduate accounting course: Student satisfaction and course design issues. The Accounting Educator's Journal, 18, 15-28.
40. Joy, E. & Garcia, F. (2000). Research paper questions ‘No Significant Difference’ claims. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21-39.
41. Karasar, N. (1999). Bilimsel arastirma yontemi- Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Ankara: Nobel .
42. Katz, E., & Blumler, J. G. (1974). The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
43. Kearsley, G. (2000). Online education: Learning and teaching in cyberspace. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
44. Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillon, M. & Christy , S. M. (2005). The effects of class size on student achievement in higher education. Cornell Higher Education Research Institute (CHERI). Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/24/.
45. Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillon, M. & Christy, S. M. (2008). The effects of class size on student grades at a public university. Economics of Education Review, 27(2), 221-33.
46. Kose, U., Koc, D., & Yucesoy, S. A. (2013). Design and development of a sample “computer programming” course tool via story -based e-learning approach. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 1235-1250.
47. Lapsley, R., Kulik,B., Moody, R., Arbaugh, J. (2008). Is identical really identical? An investigation of equivalency theory and online learning. The Journal of Educators Online, 5(1), 1-19.
48. Lorenzetti, J. P. (2002). Before they drift away: Two experts pool retention insights. Distance Education Report, 6(8), 1-2.
49. Mabrito, M. & Medley, R. (2008). Why Professor Johnny can’t read: Understanding the net generation’s texts. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(6). Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.editlib.org/j/IJOE/v/4/n/6/
50. Maltby, J. R., & Whittle, J. (2000). Learning programming online: Student perceptions and performance. ASCILITE, 2000 Conference. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/john_maltby.pdf
51. McKeachie, W. J. (1990) Research on college teaching: The historical background. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 189-200.
52. Mcquail, D. & Windahl, S. (2010). Iletisim modelleri (6th ed.). (Çev. K.Yumlu). Ankara: Imge.
53. Monks, J., Schmidt, R. (2010). The Impact of Class Size and Number of Students on Outcomes in Higher Education. Cornell Higher Education Research Institute (CHERI).
54. Motiwalla, L.F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49, 581–596.
55. Murray, B. (2001). What makes students stay. eLearn Magazine. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article_pk=1301&page_ number_nb=1&title=FEATURE%20STORY.
56. Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf.
57. Orr, G. (2003). Diffusion of innovation by Everett Rogers (1995). Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.stanford.edu/class/symbsys205/Diffusion%20of%20Innovations.htm
58. Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
59. Petrides, L.A. (2002). Web-based technologies for distributed (or distance) learning: Creating learning-centered educational experiences in the higher education classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(1), 69-77.
60. Philip, D. (2007). The knowledge building paradigm: A model of learning for Net Generation students. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(5). Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.editlib.org/j/IJOE/v/3/n/5/
61. Piccoli, G., Rami A., & Blake I. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401-26.
62. Pyari, D. (2011). Theory and distance education: At a glance. IPCSIT (12). Singapore: IACSIT Press.
63. Quillen, I. (2010). E-learning delivery debated. Education Week, 29(30), 5.
64. Rich, A.J. & Dereshiwsky, M.I. (2011). Assessing the Comparative Effectiveness of Teaching Undergraduate Intermediate Accounting in the Online Classroom Format. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(9), 19-28.
65. Rogers, M.E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations (4.ed.). New York: The Free Press.
66. Rogers, M. E. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5.ed.). New York: The Free Press.
67. Roseth, C. J.,Saltarelli, A. J., & Glass, C. R. (2011). Effects of face-to-face and computer- mediated constructive controversy on social interdependence, motivation, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 804-820.
68. Royse D. (2000). Teaching Research over the Internet: An evaluation. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 20(1), 145-158.
69. Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Montgomery, AL: International Distance Education Certification Center.
70. Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
71. Simsek, A. (2015). Do massive open online courses offer a viable solution for essential problems in higher education? In J. Lam, K. K. Ng, S. K. S. Cheung, T. L. Wong, K. C. Li, & F. L. Wang (Eds.), Technology in education: Technology-mediated proactive learning (pp. 133-142). Berlin: Springer- Verlag.
72. Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., Koh, M. (2004). Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(1), 59-70.
73. Spahn, K. (1999). Class size and faculty effectiveness and quality. 39th Annual Institutional Research Forum. Seattle, WA.
74. Stephen, DE, O’Connell, P and Hall, M (2008). Going the extra mile: ‘fire fighting’, or laissez- faire? Reevaluating personal tutoring relationships within mass higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 449-460.
75. Stivason T., Saunders G., & Price J. (2008). A comparison of student performance in an online introductory accounting course with traditional classroom students. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal, 4(5), 1-8.
76. Sun, P., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y, and Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical Investigation of the critical factors influencing learning satisfaction. Computer & Education, 50, 1183-1202.
77. Tello, S. F. (2007). An analysis of student persistence in online education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 3(3), 47-62.
78. Tolu, T. A. (2010). An exploration of synchronous communication in an online preservice ESOL course: Community of inquiry perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://search.proquest. com/docview/822619990?accountid=13654)
79. Van Der Werf, M. & Sabatier, G. (2009). The College of 2020: Students. Chronicle Research Services. Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://www.warren-wilson.edu/~ adcommittee/Tuition_Study/2020Students.pdf.
80. Vejvodova, J.(2009). The ADDIE model: Dead or alive? Retrieved on 5 February 2015 from http://virtuni.eas.sk/rocnik/2009/pdf/paper_127.pdf)
81. Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. Internet and Higher Education, 6, 77-90.
82. Watters, M. P. & Robertson, P. (2009). Online delivery of accounting courses: Student perceptions. Academy of Educational Leadership, 13(3), 51-58.
83. Westerlund, J. (2008). Class size and student evaluations in Sweden. Education Economics, 16(1), 19-28.
84. White, C. (2003). Independent language learning in distance education: Current issues. Conference on Supporting Independent Language Learning in the 21st Century. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: University of Melbourne.
85. Wilson, D. & Allen, D. (2011). Success rates of online versus traditional college students. Research in Higher Education Journal, 14, 4-12.
86. Xu, D. & Jaggars, S. S. (2010). The effectiveness of distance education in Virginia's community colleges: Evidence from introductory college-level math and English courses. Educatıonal Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 360-377.
87. Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastirma yontemleri (6th ed.). Ankara: Seckin.
88. Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H.S., (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1836-1884.
89. Correspondence: Gurhan Durak, Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Education and
90. Instructional Technologies, Necatibey Faculty of Education, Balikesir University, Balikesir, Turkey