@2024 Afarand., IRAN
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2014;7(4):221-227
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2014;7(4):221-227
Comparison of Commitment to Pedagogy in E-Learning and Traditional Training in Iran Higher Education System
ARTICLE INFO
Article Type
Original ResearchAuthors
Bagheri Majd R. (* )Ghale’ei A.R. (1 )
Mohajeran B. (1 )
Sedghi Bokani N. (2 )
Eslahi M. (1 )
(* ) Educational Sciences Department, Educational Sciences Faculty, Mahabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahabad, Iran
(1 ) Educational Sciences Department, Literature& Human Sciences Faculty, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
(2 ) Educational SciencesDepartment, Educational Sciences Faculty, Mahabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahabad, Iran
Correspondence
Address: Ramian Dormitory, Next to Homa Airline Office, Barq Junction, Daneshkadeh Street, Urmia, IranPhone: +984442336655
Fax: +984442338650
bmajd2012@gmail.com
Article History
Received: December 10, 2013Accepted: April 21, 2014
ePublished: October 7, 2014
ABSTRACT
Aims
Educational development is one of the main educational policy makers’ challenges in
the information and communication technologies era. No effective response to the real needs
of society in the field of knowledge and education production is one of the most important
issues facing higher education in the Iran. The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence of
the face to face and electronic education to the training and education principles (analysis,
design, development, implementation and evaluation) from graduate students’ view.
Materials & Methods This survey study was done on graduate students of Urmia University. 164 persons were selected by simple randomized method. The research instrument was a researchermade questionnaire with 5 indices and 66 items. Data were analyzed by SPSS 18 software and one-sample T test.
Findings There was a significant difference between e-learning and face to face education in no compliance of analysis index and its subscales including (content, learner, objectives, and media) from graduate students’ view and except the media subscale, for other cases, the mean score of no adherence to e-learning was higher. Also, there was a significant difference in no compliance of design, development, implementation and evaluation indices between e-learning and face to face education and in all cases the mean score of no compliance in e-learning was higher.
Conclusion The five education programs principals including analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation are less obeyed in the e-learning education compared with face to face education from Urmia University graduate students’ view.
Materials & Methods This survey study was done on graduate students of Urmia University. 164 persons were selected by simple randomized method. The research instrument was a researchermade questionnaire with 5 indices and 66 items. Data were analyzed by SPSS 18 software and one-sample T test.
Findings There was a significant difference between e-learning and face to face education in no compliance of analysis index and its subscales including (content, learner, objectives, and media) from graduate students’ view and except the media subscale, for other cases, the mean score of no adherence to e-learning was higher. Also, there was a significant difference in no compliance of design, development, implementation and evaluation indices between e-learning and face to face education and in all cases the mean score of no compliance in e-learning was higher.
Conclusion The five education programs principals including analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation are less obeyed in the e-learning education compared with face to face education from Urmia University graduate students’ view.
CITATION LINKS
[1]Mehralizadeh Y. Globalization, organizational change and planning for human resource development. Ahvaz: Shahid Chamran University Press; 2005. [Persian]
[2]Aliahmadi A, Ebraheimei M, Soleimani¬malekan M. ICT strategic planning program. Tehran: Publications Produced Knowledge; 2004. [Persian]
[3]Montazar Gh. Development of comparative studies in educational status of various countries around the world [Internet]. Tehran: CIVILICA. [Cited: 2003 Des 13]. Available from: http://www.civilica.com/Papers-CAICT03.html
[4]Zarei Zavvarakei E. Measurement and evaluation of e-learning. J High Educ. 2008;3(3):73-88. [Persian]
[5]Thiele JE. Learning patterns of online students. J Nurs Educ. 2003;42(8):364-6.
[6]Masiello I, Ramberg R, Lanka K. Attitudes to the application of a Web-based learning system in a microbiology course. Comput Educ. 2005;45(2):171-85.
[7]McMurray AJ. College students, the GI Bill, and the proliferation of online learning: A history of learning and contemporary challenges. Internet High Educ. 2007;10(2):143-50.
[8]Zolfaghari M, Mehrdad N, Parsa Yekta Z, Salmani Barugh N, Bahrani N. Both methods of training and lectures on e-learning course on maternal and child health nursing students. Iran J Med Educ. 2007;7(1):31-39. [Persian]
[9]Sarkaranei M, Moghaddam AR. Web-based learning and innovation in distance education. J Educ Innov. 2003;2(3):77-108. [Persian]
[10]Nichols AJ, Levy Y. Empirical assessment of college student-athletes' persistence in e-learning courses: A case study of a U.S. National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) institution. Internet High Educ. 2009;12(1):14-25.
[11]Doherty W. An analysis of multiple factors affecting retention in web-based community college courses. Internet High Educ. 2006;9(4):245-55.
[12]Levy Y. Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Comput Educ. 2007;48(2):185-204.
[13]Hall M. Realizing the virtual hamburger: Education and the margins of the network society; 2001. Available from: http://joevans.pbworks.com/f/HallHamburgerNetworkSociety.pdf.
[14]Jahangrd¬ A. Global Education in Transition. Tehran: The second E-Learning Conference; 2003. [Persian]
[15]Razzaghei S. Factors affecting the development of virtual universities in Iran and its strategic status [Dissertation]. Tehran: Tehran University; 2006. [Persian]
[16]Hoseini Largani SM, Mir Arab R, Rezayi S. An investigation of obstacles in development of E-learning in Iran educational system. J Manag Plan Educ Sys. 2008;1(1):47-61. [Persian]
[17]Shea P, Pickett A, Sauli Li C. Increasing access to higher education: A study of the diffusion of online teaching among 913 college faculty. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2005;6(2):1-27.
[18]Anstead T, Ginzburg K, Mike K, Belloli R. Using technology to further the dine college mission. Michigan: University of Michigan Business School; 2004.
[19]Gulati S. Technology-enhanced learning in developing nations: A review. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2008;9(1):1-16.
[20]Saleamabadei S. An investigation of obstacles in development of E-learning in Iran [Dissertation]. Tehran: Tehran Management University; 2006. [Persian]
[21]Punyabukkana P, Sowanwanichakul B, Suchato A. RELAD: A rapid elearning Authoring and Development Model. Bangkok: Third International Conference on e-learning for knowledge-Based society; 2006.
[22]Nancy NL, Onwuegbuzie AJ. A typology of mixed methods research designs. Qual Quant. 2009;43(2):265-75.
[23]Beritain S, Liber O. A framework for the pedagogical evaluation of e-learning environments; 1999. Available from: jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/jtap/jtap-041.pdf.
[24]Song L, Singleton ES, Hill JR, Koh MH. Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet High Educ. 2004;7(1):59-70.
[25]Vonderwell S. An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspctives of students in an online course: A case study. Internet High Educ. 2003;6(1):77-90.
[26]Dreyfus H. How far is distance learning form education?. Bull Sci Technol Soc. 2001;21(3):165-74.
[27]Taran C. Enabling SMEs to deliver synchronous online training practical guidelines. Campus Wide Inf Sys. 2006;23(3):182-95.
[28]Bersin J, O’ Leonard K. Rapid e-learning: What works study [Internet]. Oakland: Deloitte Development LLC. [Cited: 2012 Jul 31]. Available from: http://www.bersin.com/Practice/Detail.aspx?id=10335312.
[29]Archibald D. Rapid e-learning: A growing trend [Internet]. Alexandria: Association for Talent Development. [Cited: 2005 Jan 05]. Available from: http://www.astd.org/Publications/Newsletters/Learning-Circuits/Learning-Circuits-Archives/2005/01/Rapid-E-Learning-a-Growing-Trend.
[2]Aliahmadi A, Ebraheimei M, Soleimani¬malekan M. ICT strategic planning program. Tehran: Publications Produced Knowledge; 2004. [Persian]
[3]Montazar Gh. Development of comparative studies in educational status of various countries around the world [Internet]. Tehran: CIVILICA. [Cited: 2003 Des 13]. Available from: http://www.civilica.com/Papers-CAICT03.html
[4]Zarei Zavvarakei E. Measurement and evaluation of e-learning. J High Educ. 2008;3(3):73-88. [Persian]
[5]Thiele JE. Learning patterns of online students. J Nurs Educ. 2003;42(8):364-6.
[6]Masiello I, Ramberg R, Lanka K. Attitudes to the application of a Web-based learning system in a microbiology course. Comput Educ. 2005;45(2):171-85.
[7]McMurray AJ. College students, the GI Bill, and the proliferation of online learning: A history of learning and contemporary challenges. Internet High Educ. 2007;10(2):143-50.
[8]Zolfaghari M, Mehrdad N, Parsa Yekta Z, Salmani Barugh N, Bahrani N. Both methods of training and lectures on e-learning course on maternal and child health nursing students. Iran J Med Educ. 2007;7(1):31-39. [Persian]
[9]Sarkaranei M, Moghaddam AR. Web-based learning and innovation in distance education. J Educ Innov. 2003;2(3):77-108. [Persian]
[10]Nichols AJ, Levy Y. Empirical assessment of college student-athletes' persistence in e-learning courses: A case study of a U.S. National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) institution. Internet High Educ. 2009;12(1):14-25.
[11]Doherty W. An analysis of multiple factors affecting retention in web-based community college courses. Internet High Educ. 2006;9(4):245-55.
[12]Levy Y. Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Comput Educ. 2007;48(2):185-204.
[13]Hall M. Realizing the virtual hamburger: Education and the margins of the network society; 2001. Available from: http://joevans.pbworks.com/f/HallHamburgerNetworkSociety.pdf.
[14]Jahangrd¬ A. Global Education in Transition. Tehran: The second E-Learning Conference; 2003. [Persian]
[15]Razzaghei S. Factors affecting the development of virtual universities in Iran and its strategic status [Dissertation]. Tehran: Tehran University; 2006. [Persian]
[16]Hoseini Largani SM, Mir Arab R, Rezayi S. An investigation of obstacles in development of E-learning in Iran educational system. J Manag Plan Educ Sys. 2008;1(1):47-61. [Persian]
[17]Shea P, Pickett A, Sauli Li C. Increasing access to higher education: A study of the diffusion of online teaching among 913 college faculty. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2005;6(2):1-27.
[18]Anstead T, Ginzburg K, Mike K, Belloli R. Using technology to further the dine college mission. Michigan: University of Michigan Business School; 2004.
[19]Gulati S. Technology-enhanced learning in developing nations: A review. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2008;9(1):1-16.
[20]Saleamabadei S. An investigation of obstacles in development of E-learning in Iran [Dissertation]. Tehran: Tehran Management University; 2006. [Persian]
[21]Punyabukkana P, Sowanwanichakul B, Suchato A. RELAD: A rapid elearning Authoring and Development Model. Bangkok: Third International Conference on e-learning for knowledge-Based society; 2006.
[22]Nancy NL, Onwuegbuzie AJ. A typology of mixed methods research designs. Qual Quant. 2009;43(2):265-75.
[23]Beritain S, Liber O. A framework for the pedagogical evaluation of e-learning environments; 1999. Available from: jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/jtap/jtap-041.pdf.
[24]Song L, Singleton ES, Hill JR, Koh MH. Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet High Educ. 2004;7(1):59-70.
[25]Vonderwell S. An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspctives of students in an online course: A case study. Internet High Educ. 2003;6(1):77-90.
[26]Dreyfus H. How far is distance learning form education?. Bull Sci Technol Soc. 2001;21(3):165-74.
[27]Taran C. Enabling SMEs to deliver synchronous online training practical guidelines. Campus Wide Inf Sys. 2006;23(3):182-95.
[28]Bersin J, O’ Leonard K. Rapid e-learning: What works study [Internet]. Oakland: Deloitte Development LLC. [Cited: 2012 Jul 31]. Available from: http://www.bersin.com/Practice/Detail.aspx?id=10335312.
[29]Archibald D. Rapid e-learning: A growing trend [Internet]. Alexandria: Association for Talent Development. [Cited: 2005 Jan 05]. Available from: http://www.astd.org/Publications/Newsletters/Learning-Circuits/Learning-Circuits-Archives/2005/01/Rapid-E-Learning-a-Growing-Trend.