Evaluation of Three Educational Online Delivery Approaches.
暂无分享,去创建一个
In order to assess student's perceptions of outcomes of various education media formats, an exploratory investigation was conducted in the context of three different classes. Participants were traditional-age undergraduate students in the following three classes with different combinations of educational media formats: (1) Visual Communication--half of class material online (lecture notes and Power Point presentations), traditional textbook, traditional lectures based on textbook material; (2) Computer Graphic Design--online supplementary materials (illustrated notes, Power Point presentations from class lectures, and Web links to additional material), traditional textbook, no traditional lecture, a coaching/hands-on style of face-to-face teaching; and (3) World Wide Web publishing--all class materials online (tutorials, lecture notes, Power Point presentations, multimedia presentation, use of the Web as a personal slide projector), no textbook. Questionnaires were designed to measure concept learning and reaction to medium of presentation. Results indicated that students perceived strong learning outcomes from online materials and mediated modes of education. Ease of access to online materials was also assessed. Online learning was perceived to be enjoyable, interesting, and productive of desirable pedagogical outcomes such as concept learning and application. Comments from the teaching effectiveness questionnaire and copies of the class surveys are appended. Contains 13 notes. (DLS) ******************************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * ******************************************************************************** untitle dl.html http://www.mtsii.edu/e-itconf/proceed97/online_3.html Evaluation of Three Educational Online Delivery Approaches Clark Edwards, Ph.D. Janie Harden Fritz, Ph.D. Abstract Introduction Alternative Delivery Styles Methodology Graphic Design and Visual Communication: Description and Comparison Discussion Conclusions Notes Appendix A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) O This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 13 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality.Introduction Alternative Delivery Styles Methodology Graphic Design and Visual Communication: Description and Comparison Discussion Conclusions Notes Appendix A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) O This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 13 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY L. Lea TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." Abstract Overall, students perceived strong learning outcomes from online materials and from mediated modes of education overall. For all classes, mediated forms of educational delivery were well above scale item midpoints. Online learning, furthermore, is perceived to be enjoyable, interesting, and productive of desirable pedagogical outcomes such as concept learning and application. From the comparison of theoretical and applied classes, one observes that online formats are likely to be helpful for both kinds of learning tasks. Introduction A discussion of the potential of alternative education delivery technologies usually ends with the question: "Is learning as effective when delivered via alternative media as opposed to that which happens in the face-to-face classroom environment?" This is a reasonable question, given the costs associated with production of much media-based learning materials and technologies. The operative word in that question is"effective," and more accurately refers to the effectiveness of "learning" rather than "teaching." As Illich opined in the 1960s, that with technological resources education could become learning rather than teaching. The "resources" Illich wrote of in the 1960s is very much like what the Internet has become and is becoming in higher education. The Internet, as Sangster (1996) has noted, is about learning not teaching. "Learning how to learn is all about being able to adapt...being able to take past experiences and use them in the future, both in and out of the original context, being able to take a skill and alter or adjust it to work in a different context, and being able to learn new things when required." In 1983, Richard Clark reviewed the research to that date on media-delivered education and disturbed many with his conclusion that "media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction, but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition" (Clark, 1983). The fundamental questions regarding the learning "effect" seem little resolved after a decade. However, what is becoming more clear is the mediation process places greater responsibility on the "learner" side of the equation. On one side of the debate are those who contend that each medium has a unique set of characteristics that differentially support different types of learning activities, goals and outcomes. Supporters of this view argue that "understanding the ways in which students use the unique processing capabilities of the computer [or other media] is essential to understanding the influence the computer may have on learning and to building media theory" (Kozma, 1994). The students' perceptions about the 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE 4/20/99 9:18 AM untitledl.html http://www.mtsu.edu/itconf/proceed97/online_3.html 2 of 15 use of three styles of mediated delivery is a significant focus of this study. Clark, on the other side of the debate, continues to argue that "media will never influence learning" (Clark, 1994) and that differences in instructional design and learning activities, applicable to almost any medium, are the causes of differential learning outcomes under different media treatments. At the root of the debate is the complexity of the learning process itself. Certainly, one facet of this view must include the students' self-evaluation of the learning process. In fact, if a student believes they have learned, that should be the starting point for all evaluative processes in measuring learning. In some contexts, learning means acquiring a set of conceptual facts and ideas that can be quickly recalled during formal examinations. In others, learning includes the ability to integrate new knowledge critically or creatively into unique contexts. Some educators include affective responses such as "appreciation and enjoyment" in a full definition of learning. Some argue that learning has not occurred at all unless it can be demonstrated behaviorally. O'Donnell suggests that in addition to the problem of definition, there's another facet to consider: Every revolution in communication has both added to the power and range of what is communicated, and taken away some of the intimacy. Writing began the long, slow disestablishment of the face-to-face community of people who all knew each other, and every communication technique introduced since then has furthered that process.(0'Donnell, 1995) Despite the intricacies of the debate, research over the past 70 years has generally concluded that there are no significant differences between learning delivered face-to-face and that delivered by alternative media. This generalized result is used by media proponents to argue for the advantage of media delivery, since no direct human intervention is involved in the learning outcomes. Traditional delivery proponents have argued that since no learning improvements were noted, there is no compelling reason to change from time-proven (face-to-face) delivery methods. In this study, thee distinct approaches have been taken which embody three levels of the traditional approach and three differing levels of the mediated delivery approach. These approaches were taken with given that research to date has not shown complete support for either approach alone. Therefore, a reasonable optimum must be somewhere in the "middle" or somewhere in combination of the new and the traditional approach. In fact, this initial research suggests that it's not a question of "either / or" with regard to the use of mediated materials versus traditional human intervention, rather the consideration is how much of which facilitates the best learning situation. O'Donnell, an experienced user of teaching technologies, argues for the integration of technology even while educators strive to determine what "teaching" method or methods are better. "My experience these last years has been that the new technologies of networked information are indeed liberating, to real teachers and real students. It's not as though we couldn't use some help. There are plenty of frustrations for teachers, plenty of obstacles yet to surmount, plenty of barriers separating us from the students we want to reach. The best way to view information technology is to let it address the problems we already know we have (O'Donnell, 1995)." The technology of communication, however, is far from neutral, and as McLuhan points out, is loaded on the "learning" side of the equation: "When technology extends our senses a new translation of culture occurs as swiftly as the new technology is interiorized (McLuhan, 1962)." Addressing the specifics of the Internet, Teilhard de Chardin went further to predict that a web of communication technology would first grow up beside, then surround and finally would be organically assimilated into human consciousness (de Chardin, 1973). With the extraordinary developm