The Learning Platform in Distance Higher Education: Student’s Perceptions

Yıl 2019, , 71 - 95, 01.01.2019

Maria Luz Cacheıro-gonzalez Antonio Medına-rıvılla Maria Concepcion Domınguez-garrıdo Maria Medına-domınguez

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.522387

Cited By: 29

Öz

The aim of this study is to discover student’s perceptions from the School of Education about the use of the learning platform to improve educational process in distance higher education. To this end, a descriptive study with a mixed approach (quantitative and qualitative) has been applied according to the objectives of the study. An ad-hoc semi-structured questionnaire has been validated by experts, obtaining the response of 111 students of the Spanish National University of Distance Education (UNED), who are conducting social education, pedagogy, and master's degrees in education. The results showed positive values in the different dimensions analyzed: (I) Role of learning platform in distance education, (II) Instructional of the design learning platform, (III) Didactic interaction through the learning platform and (IV) The learning platform and professional practice. The analysis of the open questions, provides guidelines for improving the use of the learning platform in distance higher education regarding strengths (student’s exchange, and independent learning) and weaknesses (feedback delay, and content repository).

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning platform, ICT, student perception, higher education, distance education

Kaynakça

• Adams, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc-horizon-report-he-EN.pdf Almarashdeh, I. (2016). Sharing instructors experience of learning management system: A technology perspective of user satisfaction in distance learning course. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 249-255 Altınay, Z. (2017). Evaluating peer learning and assessment in online collaborative learning environments. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(3), 312-320. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1232752 Altunoglu, A. (2017). Initial perceptions of open higher education students with learner management systems. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 18(3), 96-104. doi: https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.328939 Arasaratnam, L. A. & Northcote, M. (2017). Community in Online Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 15(2), 188-198. Baleghi, S., Ayub, A. F. M., Mahmud, R., & Daud, S. M. (2017). The influence of system interactivity and technical support on learning management system utilization. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 9(1), 50-68. Retrieved from http://www.kmel-journal.org/ojs/index.php/online-publication/article/view/696/338 Barak, M. (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 283-303. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9501-y Bartolomé, A., Garcia, R. & Aguaded, I. (2018). Blended Learning: Panorama y Perspectivas [Blended Learning: Landscape and Perspectives]. RIED, Revista Iberoamericana de Educacion a Distancia, 21(1), 33-56. Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in A Digital Age. UK: BC Open Textbooks. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage Benedetti, C. (2015). Online instructors as thinking advisors: a model for Online Learning. Third Quarter, 12(4), 171-176. Bin, A. (2017). Faculty Perceptions of the Educational Value of Learning Management Systems. Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield. Retrieved from http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/19134/ Bousbahi, F., & Alrazgan, M. S. (2015). Investigating IT faculty resistance to learning management system adoption using latent variables in an acceptance technology model. The Scientific World Journal, 1-11. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/375651 Brazuelo, F. & Cacheiro-González, M.L. (2015). Estudio de adaptabilidad para dispositivos moviles en plataformas MOOC [Adaptability study for mobile devices on MOOC platforms]. RED, Revista de Educacion a Distancia, 47(1), 1-13. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red/47/1 Brown, M., Dehoney, J. & Millichap, N. (2015). What's Next for the LMS? Educause Review, 50(4), 40-51. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/~/media/files/article-downloads/erm1543.pdf Cabero, J. (2014). La formacion del profesorado en TIC: modelo TPACK [The training of teachers on ICT: TPACK model]. Sevilla: Secretariado de Recursos Audiovisuales y Nuevas Tecnologias de la Universidad de Sevilla. Cacheiro, M.L. (2011). Recursos educativos TIC de informacion, colaboracion y aprendizaje [ICT Educational Resources for Information, Collaboration and Learning]. Pixel-Bit, Revista de Medios y Comunicacion, 39, 69-81. Retrieved from http://acdc.sav.us.es/pixelbit/images/stories/p39/06.pdf Cho, Y.S. (2011). Diversification of learning platforms. Moscow: ITE-UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002144/214486e.pdf Chugh, R., Ledger, S., & Shields, R. (2017). Curriculum design for distance education in the tertiary sector. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 18(2),1-15. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17718/tojde.306552 Conner, M.L. (2013). Informal learning. Retrieved from http://marciaconner.com/resources/informal-learning/ Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and Qualitative Research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D. Ch., & Bichsel, J. (2014). The Current Ecosystem of Learning Management Systems in Higher Education: Student, Faculty, and IT Perspectives. Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR, Educause Center for Analysis and Research. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar Duran, A., Cornejo, J., & Flores, J. (2017). Competitive advantages with the use of ICT (moodle) in the new curriculum at the University of Guadalajara, México. Competition Forum, 15(2), 319-323. Falloon, G. (2011). Making the connection: Moore’s Theory of transactional distance and its relevance to the use of a virtual classroom in postgraduate online teacher education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 187-209. Fields, A., Lai, K.W., Gibbs, J., Kirk, A. & Vermunt, J. (2016). The transformation of an online learning community from an organized facility to an organic Fraternity. Distance Education, 37(1), 60-72. Garcia-Aretio, L. (2017). Educacion a distancia y virtual: calidad, disrupcion, aprendizajes adaptativo y movil [Distance and virtual education: quality, disruption, adaptive and mobile learning.]. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educacion a Distancia, 20(2), 9-25. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.5944/ried.20.2.18737 Garcia-Cabrero, B. (2009). Manual de métodos de investigacion para las ciencias sociales. Un enfoque de enseñanza basado en proyectos [Manual of research methods for the social sciences. A project-based teaching approach]. México: Manual Moderno. Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. (2005). El e-learning en el siglo XXI [The elearning in the XXI century]. Barcelona: Octaedro. Garrison, D.R. & Cleveland, M. (2005). Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction Is Not Enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133–148. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2 Gaytan, J. (2015). Comparing Faculty and Student Perceptions Regarding Factors that affect Student Retention in Online Education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 29, 56-66. Gharmallah, M. (2017). The Effect of Using Online Discussion Forums on Students’ Learning. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 164-176. Retrieved from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v16i1/16115.pdf Gomez, J. (ed.) (2016). UNIVERSITIC 2016. Análisis de las TIC en las Universidades Españolas [TIC Analysis in Spanish Universities]. Madrid: CRUE Universidades Españolas. Gomez, P.; Barbera, E. & Fernández, F. (2016). Measuring teachers and learners’ perceptions of the quality of their online learning experience. Distance Education, 37(2), 146-163. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1184396 Guedez, M. M., & Navea, L. C. (2014). La interaccion comunicativa en los foros de discusion de un entorno virtual de enseñanza y aprendizaje [The communicative interaction in the forums of discussion of a virtual environment of teaching and learning]. Accion Pedagogica, 23(1), 48-58. Retrieved from http://www.saber.ula.ve/handle/123456789/40899 Gurtler, L. & Huber, G.L. (2007). Modos de pensar y estrategias de la investigacion cualitativa [Ways of thinking and strategies of qualitative research]. Liberabit, 13, 37-52. Henderson, M., Selwyn, N. & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567-1579. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946 Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C. & Baptista-Lucio, P. (2010). Metodologia de la investigacion [Research methodology]. México: McGraw-Hill. Holzweias, P.C., Joyner, S.A., Fuller, M.B., Henderson, S. & Young, R. (2014). Online graduate student’s perceptions of best learning experiences. Distance Education, 35(3), 311-323. INTEF, National Institute of Educational Technologies and Teacher Training, Spain (2017). Common Digital Competence Framework For Teachers. Madrid: MECD, Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, Spain. Retrieved from http://aprende.educalab.es/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/2017_1024-Common-Digital-Competence-Framework-For-Teachers.pdf Ioannou, A. Demetriou, S. & Mama, M. (2014). Exploring factors influencing collaborative knowledge construction in online discussions: student facilitation and quality of initial postings. The American Journal of Distance Education, 28, 183-195. ITU-UNESCO (2014). Partnership on measuring ICT for development final WSIS targets review achievements, challenges and the way forward. Retrieved from http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/publications/wsisreview2014/WSIS2014_review.pdf Jain, M. & Tyagi, R. (2017). Education standard can be improved by integrating. ICT in Education. International Education & Research Journal, 3(10), 77-80. Retrieved from http://ierj.in/journal/index.php/ierj/article/view/1452/1383 Johnson, L., Adams, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Ju-Yin, T, & Yen-Chen, Y. (2016). College Students' Perspectives of E-Learning System Use in High Education. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 2(2), 53-62. Retrieved from http://www.asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/EDU/article/viewFile/889/pdf Karataş, S., Yılmaz, A. B., Dikmen, C. H., Ermiş, U. F., & Gurbuz, O. (2017). Interaction in distance education environments: A trend analysis. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(1), 63. Keane, T., Keane, W. F., & Blicblau, A. S. (2016). Beyond traditional literacy: Learning and transformative practices using ICT. Education and Information Technologies, 21(4), 769-781. doi: https://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uned.es/10.1007/s10639-014-9353-5 Kebble, P.G. (2017). Assessing Online Asynchronous Communication Strategies Designed to Enhance Large Student Cohort Engagement and Foster a Community of Learning. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(8); 92-100. doi: https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i8.2539 Khan, A., Egbue, O., Palkie, B., & Madden, J. (2017). Active learning: Engaging students to maximize learning in an online course. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 15(2), 107-115. Knyazeva, S. (2016) (ed.). Futures for Higher Education and ICT: Changes Due to the Use of Open Content. Moscow: ITE-UNESCO. Retrieved from http://iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/files/3214745.pdf Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). Revising Bloom’s Taxonomy. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218. Retrieved from http://rt3region7.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/file/view/8+Perspectives+on+RBT.pdf 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. Kwon, K., & Park, S. J. (2017). Effects of discussion representation: Comparisons between social and cognitive diagrams. Instructional Science, 45(4), 469-491. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9412-6 Lim, J., Jeong, A. C., Hall, B. M., & Freed, S. (2017). Intersubjectivity and discussion characteristics in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(1), 29-44. Lopez, E. & Camilli, C. (2014). Métodos mixtos de investigacion en modalidad b-learning: análisis de la comunicacion asincronica [Mixed methods research in b-learning modality: asynchronous communication analysis]. Historia y Comunicacion Social, 19, 403-415. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_HICS.2014.v19.44966 Lyashenko, M.S. & Frolova, N.H. (2014). LMS projects: A platform for intergenerational e-learning collaboration. Education and Information Technologies, 19, 495-513. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9333-9 Ma, J., Han, X., Yang, J., & Cheng, J. (2015). Examining the necessary condition for engagement in an online learning environment based on learning analytics approach: The role of the instructor. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 26-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.09.005 Maita, M. & Navea, L.C. (2014). La interaccion comunicativa en los foros de discusion de un entorno virtual de enseñanza y aprendizaje [The communicative interaction in the forums of discussion of a teaching and learning virtual environment]. Accion Pedagogica, 23, 48-58. Marin, V., Sampedro, B. E., & Vega, E. (2017). Percepciones de los estudiantes universitarios sobre las plataformas de formacion. estudio de caso [Perceptions of University Students about Training Platforms. Case Study]. Revista Iberoamericana De Educacion a Distancia, 20(1), 283-303. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.5044/ried.20.1.16518 Martin, F., Ahlgrim, L. & Budhrani, K. (2017) Systematic Review of Two Decades (1995 to 2014) of Research on Synchronous Online Learning. American. Journal of Distance Education, 31(1), 3-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1264807 Medina, A. & Dominguez, M.C. (2015). Modelo didáctico-tecnologico para la innovacion educativa [Didactic-technological model for educational innovation]. In M.L. Cacheiro-González, C. Sánchez & J.M. González (coords.), Recursos tecnologicos en contextos educativos [Technological resources in educational contexts]. Madrid: UNED. Medina, A., Cacheiro, M.L. & Medina-Medina, A. (2015). Caracteristicas de la práctica docente: el proceso de profesionalizacion [Characteristics of teaching practice: the professionalization process]. In A. Medina & M.C. Dominguez, Didáctica. Formacion básica para profesionales de la educacion [Didactics. Basic training for education professionals]. Madrid: Universitas. Medina, A., Pérez, L. & Campos, B. (2014). Elaboracion de planes y programas de formacion del profesorado en didácticas especiales [Preparation of teacher training plans and programs in special didactics]. Madrid: UNED. Mirriahi, N.; Alonzo, D.; McIntyre, S., Kligyte, G. & Fox, B. (2015). Blended Learning innovations: Leadership and change in one Australian Institutions. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 11(1), 4-16. Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. Retrieved from http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishra-koehler-tcr2006.pdf Moreira, J.A., Henriques, S., Goulão, M.F. & Barros, D. (2017). Digital Learning in Higher Education: A Training Course for Teaching Online - Universidade Aberta, Portugal. Open Praxis, 9(2), 253–263. Retrieved from https://openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/539/306 Moreno, V., Cavazotte, F., Alves, I. (2017). Explaining university students’ effective use of e-learning platforms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 995–1009. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12469 Murua, I., Cacheiro, M.L. & Gallego, D. (2014). Las cibercomunidades de aprendizaje (cCA) en la formacion del profesorado [The learning cybercommunities (cCA) in teacher training]. Red, Revista de Educacion a Distancia, 43(15), 12-29. Retrieved from http://www.um.es/ead/red/43/gallego_et_al.pdf Oproiu, G.C. (2015). A Study about Using E-learning Platform (Moodle) in Univeristy Teaching Process. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 426-432. Pavel, A.P.; Fruth, A. & Neacsu, M.N. (2015). ICT and E-Learning: Catalysts for Innovation and Quality in Higher Education. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 704–711. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00409-8 Pérez-Navio, E., Rodriguez, J. & Carmona, M. (2015). El uso de mini-videos en la práctica docente universitaria [The use of mini-videos in university teaching practice]. Edmetic, 4(2), 51-70. Pilli, O. (2014). LMS Vs. SNS: Can Social Networking Sites Act as a Learning Management Systems? American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 4(5), 90-97 Piscitelli, A. (2015). ¿Está cambiando la tecnologia la Universidad? Humanidades digitales y nuevo normal educativo [Is the University changing technology? Digital humanities and new normal education]. Telos, 101,13-22. Prendes, M.P. & Gutiérrez, I. (2013). Competencias tecnologicas del profesorado en las universidades españolas [Technological competences of teachers in Spanish universities]. Revista de Educacion, 361, 196-222. Puentedura, R. (2016, 12 July). How to Apply the SAMR Model with Ruben Puentedura [youtube]. Recuperado de https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQTx2UQQvbU Puentedura, R.R. (December 12, 2014). Technology In Education: An Integrated Approach. Retrieved from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/12/12/TechnologyInEducation_AnIntegratedApproach.pdf Reichardt, Ch.S. & Cook, T.D. (1986). Hacia una superacion del enfrentamiento entre los métodos cualitativos y cuantitativos [Towards an overcoming of the clash between qualitative and quantitative methods]. In Ch.S. Reichardt & T.D. Cook, Métodos cualitativos y cuantitativos en investigacion evaluativa (pp. 25-58) [Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research]. Madrid: Morata. Rienties, B. & Toetenel, L. (2016). The impact of learning design on student behavior, satisfaction and performance: A cross-institutional comparison across 151 modules. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 333-341. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.074 Sáez, J.M., Dominguez, M.C., Ruiz, J.M. & Belando, M. (2014). Análisis del uso de los sistemas de gestion de aprendizaje en el desarrollo profesional docente desde una perspectiva práctica en la Escuela Complutense [Analysis of the use of learning management systems in teacher professional development from a practical perspective in the Complutense School]. Bordon, 66(3), 133-148. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2014.66309 Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., y Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). The Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument for Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544 Scoppio, G. & Luyt, I. Educ Inf Technol (2017). Mind the gap: Enabling online faculty and instructional designers in mapping new models for quality online. Education and Information Technologies, 22(3), 725–746. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9452-y Selwyn, N. (2016). Digital downsides: exploring university students’ negative engagements with digital technology. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 1006-1021. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1213229 Shaw, C., Larson, R. & Sibdari, S. (2014). An asynchronous, personalized learning platform-Guided Learning Pathways (GLP). Creative Education, 5, 1189-1204. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2014.513135 Valles, M. (1997). Técnicas cualitativas de investigacion social. Reflexion metodologica y práctica profesional [Qualitative techniques of social research. Methodological reflection and professional practice]. Madrid: Sintesis. Xiao, J. (2017). Learner-content interaction in distance education: The weakest link in interaction research. Distance Education, 38(1), 123-135. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1298982 Yot, C. & Marcelo, C. (2017). University students self-regulated learning using digital technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 1-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0076-8 Zagalsky, A., Feliciano, J., Storey, M.A., Zhao, Y. & Wang, W. (2015). The Emergence of GitHub as a Collaborative Platform for Education. Motivation and Dynamics of the Open Classroom. CSCW 2015, March 14-18, 2015. Vancouver, BC, Canada. Zanjani, N., Edwards, S. L., Nykvist, S., & Geva, S. (2016). LMS Acceptance: The Instructor Role. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(4), 519-526. Zapata, M. (2011). Evaluacion de la calidad en entornos sociales de aprendizaje [Evaluation of quality in social learning environments]. RED, Revista de Educacion a Distancia, 29, 1-10.9 Zhu, Y., Au, W. & Yates, G. (2016). University student’s self-control and self-regulated learning in a blended course. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 54-62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.04.001 Zimmerman, B.J. (1990). Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.