-

Öz

The purpose of the study is to compare the performance levels and attendance rates of online learners and traditional learners in the course of Pogramming Languages I. In addition, the effect of the students‟ GPA scores and attendance rates on the performance scores in Pogramming Languages I was investigated. The sample group of the study consists of 38 learners studying at the Department of Computers Education and Instructional Technologies and taking the course Programming Languages I. The experimental group was selected through the purposive sampling while the control group was selected by using the matching design. The learners in the experimental group took the courses only distantly during the 14-week period. The learners in the control group, on the other hand, took the courses through traditional methods.The learners who took courses through DLP and some virtual classroom applications had exactly the same number of hours as the traditional group did. Mid-term and final exams prepared by the experts of the field were evaluated as the learners‟ achievement scores. Besides, the demographic information, attendance rates and GPA scores of students were taken from the university‟s stundent information system. The results of the study demonstrated that learners in the experimental group were more successful than the learners in the control group and that they attended classes more often

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Distance education, online learning, programming languages, academic performance

The Effects of a Distance Education Programming Language Course on Student Performance / Uzaktan Eğitimle Verilen Programlama Dilleri Dersinin Öğrenen Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Programlama Dilleri I dersi için hazırlanan çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamı olan Uzaktan Öğrenme Platformuna (UÖP) ilişkin, uzaktan öğrenenlerle geleneksel öğrenenlerin başarılarını ve derse devam oranlarını karşılaştırmaktır. Bunun yanında öğrenenlerin geçmiş başarılarının ve derse devam oranlarının bu dersten aldıkları başarı puanlarına etkisi araştırılmıştır.

Araştırmanın çalışma kümesini, Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Eğitimi bölümünde Programlama Dilleri I dersini alan 38 öğrenen oluşmaktadır. Amaçlı örnekleme sonucunda deney grubu, deney grubuyla eşleştirme yöntemi kullanılarak da kontrol grubu oluşturulmuştur. Deney grubundaki öğrenenler 14 haftalık dönem boyunca derslere tamamen uzaktan erişmişlerdir. Kontrol grubundaki öğreneneler ise geleneksel yöntemlerle dersleri almışlardır. Bu öğrenenlere sanal sınıf uygulamalarıyla, belirlenen zamanlarda ve geleneksel yöntemle işlenen derslerle birebir aynı ders saati uygulanmıştır. Alan uzmanları tarafından hazırlanan ara sınav ve yarıyıl sonu sınavları, öğrenenlerin başarı puanı olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Aynı zamanda öğrenci bilgi sistemi üzerinden, öğrenenlerin akademik ortalama, derse devam oranları ve diğer demografik bilgilerine ulaşılmıştır.

Araştırma sonucunda, deney grubu öğrenenlerinin kontrol grubundaki öğrenenlere kıyasla daha başarılı oldukları ve derslere daha çok devam ettikleri sonucu ortaya çıkmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uzaktan eğitim, çevrimiçi öğrenme, programlama dilleri, akademik başari

Kaynakça

1. Allen, I.E. and Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. Wellesley MA: Babson College/Quahog Research http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/changingcourse.pdf tarihi: 03.12.2012) Group. (Erişim
2. Aly, İ.(2013). Performance in an Online Introductory Managerial Accounting Course in a Classroom Setting. AHAHEIM 2013, Brilliantly Disguised Opportunities, http://aaahq.org/AM2013/abstract.cfm?submissionID=597 (Erişim tarihi: 15.03.2013) Kaliforniya.
3. Arıkan, Y.D. (2006). Web Destekli Etkin Öğrenme Uygulamalarının Öğretmen Adaylarının Derse Yönelik Tutumları Üzerindeki Etkileri. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 7(1), 23–41.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Bills, D.P & Biles, J.A. (2005). The role of programming in IT.SIGITE'05Conference. Newark, New Jersey, ss 43-49.
7. Borthick, A. F., and 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.
8. Bouhnik, D. and Marcus, T. (2006). Interaction in distance-learning courses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 299-305.

9. Çavuş, N., Uzunboylu, H. and 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.
10. 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.
11. Diaz, D. P. (2002). Online drop rates revisited. The Technology Source (Online).http://technologysource.org/article/online_drop_rates_revisited/ (Erişim tarihi: 10.01.2013)
12. 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.
13. Durak, G. (2009). Algoritma Konusunda Geliştirilen “Programlama Mantığı Öğretici-P.M.Ö” Yazılımının Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Balıkesir: Balıkesir Üniversitesi.
14. Dutton, J., Dutton, M., and Perry, J. (1999). Do online students perform as well as lecture students? Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 131–139.
15. Farag, W. (2012). Comparing Achievement of Intended Learning Outcomes in Online Programming Classes with Blended Offerings. SIGITE Conference. Calgary, Alberta: Mount Royal University, ss. 25-30.
16. Feintuch, H. (2010). Keeping their distance. Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 27(3), 20. http://www.questia.com/library/1P3-1995232661/keeping-their- distance (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2013)
17. Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners dropout. Workforce, 10, 53–63.
18. Friday, E., Friday-Stroud, S. S., Green, A. L., & Hill. A. Y. (2006). A multi- semester comparison ofstudent performance between multiple traditional and online sections of two management courses. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 8(1), 66-81.
19. 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.
20. Gunawardena, C. N. & McIsaac, M. S. (2004). Distance education. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (ED: D. H.Jonassen). Mahwah: Erlbaum, ss.355-396.
21. Gülbahar, Y. (2009). e-öğrenme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
22. Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The Virtual Classroom: Learning Without Limits via Computer Networks. Norwood NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp., Human-computer Interaction Series.
23. Hopper, K. B. (2003). In defense of the solitary learner: A response to collaborative, constructivist education. Educational Technology, 43(2), 24-29.
24. 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.
25. James, G. (2002). Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Learning. http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wbts/nieuw_basics/addis.pdf 04.01.2013) (Erişim tarihi:
26. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., and Haywood, K., (2011). The 2011 Texas: Horizon http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/hr2011.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 12.01.2013) Austin, The New Media Consortium.
27. 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.
28. Joy, E., and Garcia, F. (2000). Research paper questions „No Significant Difference‟ claims. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21 – 39.
29. Karasar, N. (1998). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
30. Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillon, M. & Christy , S. M. (2005) The effects of class size on http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/24/ (Erişim tarihi: 02.01.2013) achievement in higher education.
31. Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillon, M. & Christy, S. M. (2008). The Effects of Class Size on Student Grades at a Public University. Economics of EducationReview, 27(2), 221-33.
32. Köse, U., Koç, D. & Yücesoy, 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.
33. 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.
34. Liu, Y. (2007). A comparative study of learning styles between online and traditional students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(1), 41- 63.
35. Lorenzetti, J. P. (2002). Before They Drift Away: Two Experts Pool Retention Insights. Distance Education Report, 6(8), 1-2.
36. Maltby, J. R., & Whittle, J. (2000). Learning programming online: Student perceptions http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/john_maltby.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 11.02.2013) ASCILITE, 2000 Conference.
37. McKeachie, W. J. (1990) Research on College Teaching: The Historical Background. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 189-200. McLeod, S. A. (2007). Experimental Design-Simply Psychology. http://www.simplypsychology.org/experimental-designs.html (Erişim tarihi: 10.04.2013)
38. Meyer, R. (2012). What it‟s like to teach a MOOC (and what the heck‟s a MOOC?), http://tinyurl.com/cdfvvqy (Erişim tarihi: 08.03.2013)
39. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
40. 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.
41. Philip, D. (2007). The knowledge building paradigm: A model of learning for Net Generation students. Innovate, 3(5).
42. Piccoli, Gabriele, Rami Ahmad, and Blake Ives. (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.
43. Quillen, I. (2010). E-learning delivery debated. Education Week, 29(30), 5. http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/50356379/e-learning-delivery- debated (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2013)
44. 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.
45. 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.
46. Royse D. (2000). Teaching Research over the Internet: An Evaluation. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 20(1), 145-158.
47. Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon. Montgomery, AL: International Distance Education Certification Center.
48. Saulnier (2009). From “Sage on the Stage” to “Guide on the Side” Revisited: (Un)Covering the Content in the Learner-Centered Information Systems Course. Information Systems Education Journal, 7 (60).
49. Sehrt, M. (2003). e-Learning in the Developing Countries: Digital divide into digital opportunities. UN Chronicle, XL(4). http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2003/issue4/0403p45.asp (Erişim tarihi: 03.01.2013)
50. Shachar, M., Neumann, Y. (2003). Differences Between Traditional and Distance Education Academic Performances: A metaanalytic approach. International Review http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/153/704 (Erişim tarihi: 15.03.2013) in Open andDistance Learning, 4(2).
51. Smelser, L. (2002). Making Connections in Our Classrooms: Online and Off. Annual Meeting on College Composition and Communication Chicago, IL. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED464323 (Erişim tarihi: 21.03.2013)
52. Spahn, K. (1999). Class Size and Faculty Effectiveness and Quality. 39th Annual Institutional Research Forum, Seattle, WA.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. Van Der Werf, M. & Sabatier, G. (2009). The College of 2020: Students. Chronicle Research wilson.edu/~adcommittee/Tuition_Study/2020Students.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 10.01.2013) Services. http://www.warren
57. 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.
58. Watters, M. P. & Robertson, P. (2009). Online delivery of accounting courses: Student perceptions, Academy of Educational Leadership, 13(3), 51-58.
59. Westerlund, J. (2008). Class Size and Student Evaluations in Sweden. Education Economics, 16(1), 19-28.
60. Wilson, D., & Allen, D. (2011). Success rates of online versus traditional college students. http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/11761.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2013) in Higher Education Journal, 14.
61. 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. Manuscript submitted for publication.
62. 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.