Türkiye’de Uzaktan Eğitimde Algılanan Öğrenme Memnuniyetini Etkileyen Faktörler

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, algılanan öğrenme memnuniyetini artırabilmek için uzaktan eğitim değişkenlerinin birbiri arasındaki ilişkisine bakılarak hangi değişkenlere odaklanmak gerektiğini belirlemektir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçlarına Türkiye’de 5574 devlet üniversitesi öğrencisinden toplanan verilerle kurulan model ile ulaşılmıştır. Bu bağlamda literatüre katkıda bulunacağı düşünülmektedir. Bu araştırmada özgün olan diğer bir nokta ise; sonuçların güvenilirliği için, pandemi sürecinde üniversitelerdeki uzaktan eğitim altyapısının eksiklerinin giderilmesi beklenip, iyileştirilen altyapı hizmetlerinden sonra uzaktan eğitimi alan üniversite öğrencilerine uygulanan anket formu yardımıyla yapılmış olmasıdır. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkinin anlamlılığını araştırmak için birçok bilim dalı tarafından kullanılan yapısal eşitlik modeli uygulanmıştır. Uygulanan yöntem sonucunda teknoloji, materyal, destek hizmetleri, ölçme ve değerlendirme faktörleri ile öğrencilerin uzaktan öğrenme memnuniyeti algısı üzerinde anlamlı ilişki olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca materyal ve teknoloji değişkenlerinin destek hizmetleri değişkeniyle arasında anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur. Destek hizmetleri ile ölçme ve değerlendirme değişkeni arasında ise anlamlı ilişki olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Destek hizmetlerinin aracı değişken olarak kurulduğu modelde de anlamlı bir ilişki olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışmada kurulan model ile değişkenler arasında bulunan ilişkiler dikkate alınarak uzaktan eğitim hizmetleri üzerine önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uzaktan Eğitim
• Uzaktan Öğrenme
• Üniversite Öğrencileri
• Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli
• Türkiye

Factors Affecting Perceived Learning Satisfaction in Distance Education in Turkey

Öz

The study aims to determine which variables to be focused on by viewing the relationship between the variables of distance education to increase perceived learning satisfaction. The results of this study were obtained with the measurement model established with the data collected from 5574 state university students in Turkey. Within this context, it is thought to contribute to the literature. Another unique point in this study is; for the reliability of the results, it was expected that the deficiencies of the distance education infrastructure in universities would be eliminated during the pandemic process, and it was made with the help of a questionnaire applied to university students who received distance education after the improved infrastructure services. The structural equation model used by many disciplines was applied to investigate the significance of the relationship between the variables. As a result of the method applied, it was determined that there was a significant relationship between the technology, materials, support services, measurement and evaluation factors and the perception of distance learning satisfaction of the students. In addition, a significant relationship was found between the material and technology variables and the support services variable. No significant relationship was found between support services and measurement and evaluation variables. There was also no significant relationship in the model in which support services were established as a mediator variable. In this study, distance education policies on distance education services have been proposed, considering the relationships between the model established and the variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Distance Education
• Distance Learning
• Student Satisfaction
• Educational Programs
• Structural Equation Model
• Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Aguilera-Hermida, A. P. (2020). College students’ use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to Covid-19. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011
2. Aguilera-Hermida, A. P., Quiroga-Garza, A., Gómez-Mendoza, S., Villanueva, C. A. D. R., Alecchi, B. A., & Avci, D. (2021). Comparison of students’ use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to Covid-19 in the USA, Mexico, Peru, and Turkey. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 6823–6845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10473-8
3. Akyürek, M. İ. (2020). Uzaktan eğitim: Bir alanyazin taramasi. Medeniyet Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 1–9.
4. Al Lily, A. E., Ismail, A. F., Abunasser, F. M., & Alqahtani, R. H. A. (2020). Distance education as a response to pandemics: Coronavirus and Arab culture. Technology in Society, 63, 101317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101317
5. Almaleki, D. A., Alhajaji, R. A., & Alharbi, M. A. (2021). Measuring students' interaction in distance learning through the electronic platform and its impact on their motivation to learn during Covid-19 Crisis. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 21(5), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2021.21.5.16
6. Araka, E., Maina, E., Gitonga, R., & Oboko, R. (2020). Research trends in measurement and intervention tools for self-regulated learning for e-learning environments—systematic review (2008–2018). Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(6), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-020-00129-5
7. Avila, E. C., Abin, G. J., Bien, G. A., Acasamoso, D. M., & Arenque, D. D. (2021). Students’ perception on online and distance learning and their motivation and learning strategies in using educational technologies during Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1933(1), 012130. https://doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012130
8. Aydemir, M. (2018). Uzaktan eğitim, program, ders ve materyal tasarımı. Eğitim Kitapevi.

9. Bahati, B., Fors, U., Hansen, P., Nouri, J., & Mukama, E. (2019). Measuring learner satisfaction with formative e-assessment strategies. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(7), 61–79.
10. Baran, H. (2020). Açık ve uzaktan eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 28–40.
11. Bozkurt, A. (2013, 23-25 Ocak). Mega üniversitelerde öğrenci destek hizmetleri [Sözlü bildiri]. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı, Antalya, Türkiye.
12. Chen, T., Peng, L., Yin, X., Rong, J., Yang, J., & Cong, G. (2020, July). Analysis of user satisfaction with online education platforms in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare, 8(3), 200. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8030200
13. Daumiller, M., Rinas, R., Hein, J., Janke, S., Dickhäuser, O., & Dresel, M. (2021). Shifting from face-to-face to online teaching during COVID-19: The role of university faculty achievement goals for attitudes towards this sudden change, and their relevance for burnout/engagement and student evaluations of teaching quality. Computers in Human Behavior, 118, 106677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106677
14. Demirci, M. (2019). Uzaktan eğitimde öğrenme stillerine dayalı akademik destek hizmetlerinin pedagojik formasyon öğrencilerinin başarısına etkisi [Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Sakarya Üniversitesi.
15. Efiloğlu Kurt, Ö. (2015). Üniversite öğrencilerinin uzaktan eğitime bakış açılarının teknoloji kabul modeli ve bilgi sistemleri başarı modeli entegrasyonu ile belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(3), 223–234.
16. Evans, T., & Nation, D. (1993). Introduction: Reforming in open and distance education. Kogan Page.
17. Eygu, H., & Karaman, S. (2013). A study on the satisfaction perceptions of the distance education students. Kırıkkale University Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 36–59.
18. Eygü, H., Oktay, E., & Oktay, M. (2022). Üniversite gençliğinin sosyal medya bağımlılığı. Atatürk Üniversitesi Yayınları. https://ekitap.atauni.edu.tr
19. Fırat, M., Kılınç, H., & Yüzer, T. V. (2018). Level of intrinsic motivation of distance education students in e‐learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12214
20. Galusha, J. M. (1997). Barriers to learning in distance education. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 5(3-4), 1–23.
21. Garrison, D. R., & Shale, D. (1987). Mapping the boundaries of distance education: Problems in defining the field. American Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648709526567
22. Gök, B., & Çakmak, E. K. (2020). Uzaktan eğitimde ders veren öğretim elemanlarının uzaktan eğitim algısı. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 28(5), 1915–1931. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3914
23. Göksu, İ., Ergün, N., Özkan, Z., & Sakız, H. (2021). Distance education amid a pandemic: Which psycho‐demographic variables affect students in higher education? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(6), 1539–1552. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12544
24. Hamdan, K. M., Al-Bashaireh, A. M., Zahran, Z., Al-Daghestani, A., Samira, A. H., & Shaheen, M. (2021). University students' interaction, internet self-efficacy, self-regulation and satisfaction with online education during pandemic crises of Covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2). International Journal of Educational Management, 35(3), 714–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-11-2020-0513
25. Haznedar, Ö., & Baran, B. (2012). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencileri için e-öğrenmeye yönelik genel bir tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 2(2), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.84225
26. Helvacı, M. A., & Aydoğan, İ. (2011). Etkili okul ve etkili okul müdürüne ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(2), 41–60.
27. Hernawati, D., Nandiyanto, A. B. D., & Muhammad, N. (2021). The use of learning videos in order to increase student motivation and learning outcomes during the Covid-19 pandemic. ASEAN Journal of Science and Engineering Education, 1(2), 77–80.
28. Hockridge, D. (2013). Challenges for educators using distance and online education to prepare students for relational professions. Distance Education, 34(2), 142–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.793640
29. Holt, D. M., & Thompson, D. J. (1998). Managing information technology in open and distance higher education. Distance education, 19(2), 197–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791980190203
30. Hough, M. (1984). Motivation of adults: implications of adult learning theories for distance education. Distance Education, 5(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791840050101
31. Howell, S. L. (2006). Online assessment, measurement, and evaluation: Emerging practices. IGI Global. Isman, A. (1996). Living in the information age: Global distance education. ED-Education at a Distance Journal, 10(8), 1–20.
32. Karademir, A., Yaman, F., & Saatçioglu, Ö. (2020). Challenges of higher education institutions against COVID-19: The case of Turkey. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(4), 453–474.
33. Kaya, Z., & Tan, S. (2014). New trends of measurement and assessment in distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 206–217.
34. Kolcu, G., Demir, S., Gülle, K., Atay, T., Kolcu, M. İ. B., & Koşar, A. (2020). Evaluation of transition to distance education in COVID-19 pandemic. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-35396
35. Korucuk, B. (2020). Sınıf öğretmenleri gözüyle uzaktan eğitim memnuniyet faktörlerinin derecelendirilmesi yönelik bir çalışma: Giresun ili örneği. Öğretim Teknolojisi ve Hayat Boyu Öğrenme Dergisi, 1(2), 189–202.
36. Krishnan, C. (2012). Student support services in distance higher education in India: A critical appraisal. International Journal of Research in Economics & Social Sciences, 2(2), 459–472.
37. McGann, K. C., Melnyk, R., Saba, P., Joseph, J., Glocker, R. J., & Ghazi, A. (2021). Implementation of an e-learning academic elective for hands-on basic surgical skills to supplement medical school surgical education. Journal of Surgical Education, 78(4), 1164–1174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.014
38. Mok, K. H., Xiong, W., & Bin Aedy Rahman, H. N. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic’s disruption on university teaching and learning and competence cultivation: Student evaluation of online learning experiences in Hong Kong. International Journal of Chinese Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/22125868211007011
39. Moore, R. L., & Fodrey, B. P. (2018). Distance education and technology infrastructure: Strategies and opportunities. In Piña, A., Lowell, V., & Harris, B. (Eds.), Leading and managing e-learning. educational communications and technology: Issues and innovations (pp. 87–100). Springer.
40. Özalkan, G. Ş. (2021). Uzaktan eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme: Pandemi sürecinde sosyal bilimler eğitimini yeniden düşünmek. International Journal of Economics Administrative and Social Sciences, 4, 18–26.
41. Özseven, B. E., & Cagman, N. (2021). Uzaktan eğitimde kullanılan bulanık mantık tabanlı öğrenme modelleri, platformlar, ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 25, 406–416. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.898349
42. Panigrahi, R., Srivastava, P. R., & Panigrahi, P. K. (2020). Effectiveness of e-learning: The mediating role of student engagement on perceived learning effectiveness. Information Technology & People, 34(7), 1840–1862. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2019-0380
43. Pham, L., Limbu, Y. B., Bui, T. K., Nguyen, H. T., & Pham, H. T. (2019). Does e-learning service quality influence e-learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(7), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0136-3
44. Schmidt, F. L. ve Hunter, J. E. (2014). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. New York: Sage.
45. Selvanathan, M., Hussin, N. A. M., & Azazi, N. A. N. (2020). Students learning experiences during COVID-19: Work from home period in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions. Teaching Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739420977900
46. Shaffer, S. C. (2012). Distance education assessment infrastructure and process design based on international standard 23988. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 15(2).
47. Stradiotová, E., Nemethova, I., & Stefancik, R. (2021). Comparison of on-site testing with online testing during the Covid-19 pandemic. Advanced Education, 8(17). 73–83. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.229264
48. Süğümlü, Ü. (2021). A case study on teaching Turkish through distance education. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 8(1), 174–190. https://doi.org/10.17220/ijpes.2021.8.1.278
49. Tsai, C. L., Ku, H. Y., & Campbell, A. (2021). Impacts of course activities on student perceptions of engagement and learning online. Distance Education, 42(1), 106–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1869525
50. Tüzün, F., & Toraman, N. Y. (2021). Pandemi döneminde uzaktan eğitim memnuniyetini etkileyen faktörler. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(3), 822–845. https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.780189
51. Wang, C., Hsu, H. C. K., Bonem, E. M., Moss, J. D., Yu, S., Nelson, D. B., & Levesque-Bristol, C. (2019). Need satisfaction and need dissatisfaction: A comparative study of online and face-to-face learning contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.034
52. Wei, H. C., & Chou, C. (2020). Online learning performance and satisfaction: Do perceptions and readiness matter? Distance Education, 41(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1724768
53. Yilmaz Ince, E., Kabul, N., & Kabul, A. (2022). Inequality of opportunity in distance education during the pandemic process. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 21(1), 68–79.
54. Yılmaz, E. O., & Toker, T. (2022). Covıd-19 salgını öğretmenlerin dijital yeterliliklerini nasıl etkiledi? Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 51(235), 2713–2730. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.896996