Students’ Attitudes Towards 
Webct Applications In Selected Courses

Year 2009, Volume: 10 Issue: 1, 47 - 56, 01.03.2009

Mehpare TOKAY Argan

Abstract

WebCT is one of the widely used web-based learning tools. For enriching teaching and learning courses at tertiary level, WebCT emerges as an important tool. This paper describes attitudes of students at Anadolu University towards WebCT applications in selected courses. Furthermore, the study describes the attitudes of a sample of students towards WebCT and analyzes data to determine the effect of WebCT dimensions on satisfaction, course advising, and course preference on their overall perception and referral of a course. The findings indicate the emergence of four WebCT dimensions. These factors are access and interaction, learning experience, time and compensation, and exam and exercise. The dimensions are positively associated with satisfaction, course advising, and course preference. The results of this research have significant implications for both the web-based learning as a whole, and it would be a contribution to relatively limited literature on the attitudes towards WebCT enhanced courses in Turkey.

Keywords

Edutainment, Entertainment, Marketing Education, Experiential Learning, E-Learning And Webct

References

• Aikem, M., Vanjani, M., Ray, B. and Martin, J. (2003). College Students Internet Use.
• Campus-Wide Information Systems, 20 (5), 182-185. Carswell, A. D., and Venkatesh, V. (2002). Learner outcomes in an asynchronous distance education environment. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 56, 475–
• Chiu, C. M.,and Wang, E. T. G. (2008). Understanding Web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task values. Information & Management, 45, 194-201.
• Clark, J. (2002). A product review of WebCT. Internet and Higher Education 5, 79-82.
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 319-340.
• Fletcher, K. M. (2005). Self-efficacy as an evaluation measure for programs in support of online learning literacies for undergraduates. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 307-322.
• Gegez, A. E. (2005). Pazarlama Arastirmalari. Istanbul: Beta.
• Hightower, B. Rawl, C. and Schutt, M. (2008). Collaborations for delivering the library to students through WebCT. Reference Services Review, 35 (4), 541-551.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The implication of electronic computers to factor analysis.
• Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20: 141-151. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrics, 39, 31-36.
• Kim, S. S., Lee, C. K., and Klenosky, D. B. (2003). The influence push and pull factors at
• Korean national parks. Tourism Management, 24, 169-180. Kraemer, E.W. (2003). Developing the Online Learning Environment: The Pros and Cons of Using WebCT for Library Instruction. Information Technology and Libraries, 22 (2), 92.
• Lee, J. and MacMillan, D. (2004). Evolving instruction in biology: using the web to improve in-class instruction. Reference Services Review, 32 (4), 374-382.
• Lu, J., Yu, C. S., and Liu, C. (2003). Learning style, learning patterns, and learning performance in a WebCT-based MIS. Information & Management, 40(6), 497-507.
• Morss, D.A. (1999). A study of student perspectives on Web-based learning: WebCT in the classroom. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 9 (5), 408.
• Ngai, E. W. T., Poon, J. K. L., and Chan, Y.H.C. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers & Education, 48, 250-267.
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hall.
• Romanova, K. and Nevgi, A. (2006). Learning outcomes in medical informatics:
• Comparison of a WebCT course with ordinary web site learning material. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 75, 156-162. Tao, Y. H. (2008). Typology of college student perception on institutional e-learning issues – An extension study of a teacher‘s typology in Taiwan. Computers & Education, , 1495-1508.
• Wernet, S. P., Olliges, R. H., and Delicath, T. A. (2000). Postcourse evaluation of WebCT
• (Web course tools) classes by social work students. Research on Social Work Practice, 10 (4), 487-504. Willett, H. G. (2002). Not one or the other but both: hybrid course delivery using WebCT.
• The Electronic Library, 20 (5), 413-419. Withnam, S. A., Krockover, G. H., Ridgway, K. D., and Zinsmeister, W. J. (2002). Lessons online. Journal of College Science Teaching, 32 (4), 264-269.
• Woo, Y. and Reeves, T.C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 15-25.
• Zhang, J. J., Pennington, G.L., Connaughton, D.P., Braunstein, J. R., Ellis, M. H., Lam, E. T. C., and Williamson, D. (2003). Understanding women‘s professional football game spectators: sociodemographics, game consumption, and entertainment options. Sport
• Marketing Quarterly, 12 (4), 228-243.