Internet Usage Habits as a Part of Distance Higher Education

Abstract

Within the scope of this study, which deals with distance education method as a communication process, a focus group interview was conducted with voluntary students who were randomly selected from various areas/majors at the Department of Distance Education in Istanbul University in order to determine the relationship between their general Internet usage habits and their Internet usage as a part of distance learning and in line with their expectations. The questions posed for the students during the interview process were drawn up on the basis of Internet medium serving a mass medium and for multi-purposes. The study revealed a positive relationship between general Internet usage habits of distance education students and their particular Internet usage habits during their education. It is concluded that the ability of students to adapt to social media applications and especially to social networks, which are the latest Internet applications based on interactive communications, is considerably high. The expectations of the students from the latest Internet applications are also high when it comes to distance education process.

Keywords

• Distance Education, Internet usage habits, Information and communication technologies in education, Communication

Kaynakça

1. Aggarwal, A. (2000). Web-based learning and teaching technologies: Opportunities and challenges. Hershey-USA: Idea Group.
2. Barbe, W., Swassing, R., & Milone M. (1979). Teaching through modality strengths: Concepts and practices. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.
3. Benson, L.; Harkavy, I. (2000). “Higher education’s third revolution: The emergence of the democratic cosmopolitan civic university”. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research. 5 (1), 47–57.
4. Bhattacherjee, A., 2001. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation- confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351-370
5. Hillage, J., Pollard, E. (2001). Exploring e-learning. Brighton, UK: Institute for Employment Studies.
6. Holtz, S. (2002). Public relations on the net. (2nd ed.) New York: Amacom.
7. Inceoglu, M. (2010). Tutum, algi, iletisim (5th ed.) İstanbul: Beykent Universitesi Yayinlari (No. 69).
8. Komito, L. & Bates, J. (2009). Virtually local: Social media and community among Polish nationals in Dublin”. ASLIB proceedings: New information perspectives, 61(3), 232-244.

9. Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. London: Sage Publications.
10. Limayem M. & Cheung C. M.K. (2011) Predicting the continued use of Internet-based learning technologies: The role of habit. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(1), 91-99
11. Mayfield, A. (2008). What is social media, Retrieved on 16 April 2015 from http://www.icrossing.com/sites/default/files/what-is-social-media-uk.pdf
12. Oskay, U. (1999). Iletisimin ABC’si, (2nd ed.) Istanbul: Der.
13. Poster, M. (1997). Cyberdemocracy: The Internet and the public sphere. London and New Delhi: Sage.
14. Rheingold, H. (2000). The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Sharpe, R. & Benfield, G. (2005). The student experience of e-learning in higher education. Brookes e-Journal of Learning and Teaching, 1(3). Retrieved on 14 October 2011 from http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/paper/the-student-experience-of-e-learning-in-higher- education-a-review-of-the-literature/
16. Tight, G. D. (2007). The role of learning style preference and instructional method in the acquisition of L2 Spanish vocabulary. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
17. Tsai, S. & Machado P. (2002). E-learning, online learning, Web-based learning, or distance learning: Unveiling the ambiguity in current terminology. Retrieved on 14 October 2011 from http://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=568597
18. Correspondence: Firat Tufan, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Communication, Istanbul
19. University, Beyazit, Istanbul, Turkey