ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Barghi   I. (* )
Maleki   H. (1 )
Abbaspur   A. (1 )
Zareii Zavaraki   E. (1 )
Seraji   F. (2 )






(* ) Management & Educational Planning Department, Psychology & Educational Sciences Faculty, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran
(1 ) Management & Educational Planning Department, Psychology & Educational Sciences Faculty, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran
(2 ) Management & Educational Planning Department, Psychology & Educational Sciences Faculty, Bu- Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

Correspondence

Address: No. 15, Sedaqat Alley, Iman 12 meter, Azadi Ave., Marand, Iran
Phone: +984912259619
Fax: +984923025252
isabarqi@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:   July  26, 2013
Accepted:   November 9, 2013
ePublished:   March 17, 2014

ABSTRACT

Aims Establishment and development of E-learning requires the use of new technological processes and media along with modern teaching methods. The aim of this study was to design and validate the favorable problem-based curriculum pattern in e-learning universities.
Materials & Methods This quantitative exploring combining study was performed among all the 117 faculty members of the educational centers with electronic courses in Tehran. Qualitative method of phenomenology and theoretical analysis were used to design a pattern in order to reach the aimed facts and data. From the population, 8 informationists were selected, using purposive non- probability sampling method, and they underwent a semi- structured interviews. Interview with faculty members was carried out to the point of saturation. For validation of the model, 18 participants were selected, using satisfaction function, and they answered the questionnaire, using Delphi method. Van Mannen phenomenological approach and content analysis were used for qualitative data analysis, and fuzzy factor analysis based on the fuzzy sets theory was used to analyze data of the quantitative part.
Findings The number of the elements in the problem- based e- learning curriculum might be classified in 114 sub-categories and 12 categories. Except 4 indices which were detected as having low to moderate importance by experts, other indices were important up to the high and very high level in the desired model of the problem-based curriculum.
Conclusion The desired model for problem-based curriculum for e-learning centers of the state universities in Tehran combines from twelve elements containing goals, environment, tool and infrastructure, instructor, learner, learning methods, area (environment), time, basics, structure, evaluation and strategy.

Keywords: Curriculum, Problem-Based, E-learning,

CITATION LINKS

[1]Arasteh H. Virtual University. Tehran: Approaches Publication; 2002.
[2]Thurab-Nkhosi D, Marshall S. Quality management in course development and delivery at the University of the West Indies distance education centre. Qual Assur Educ. 2009;17(3):264-80.
[3]Tucker JP, Gentry GR. Developing an e-learning strategy in higher education. Foresight. 2009;11(2):43-9.
[4]Saadaty P, Yare T. Instruction the electoronic. Zanjan: Collection of Essays of E-Learning Congress; 2006.
[5]Barnett R, Coate K. Engaging the curriculum in higher education. New York: McGraw-Hill International; 2004.
[6]Fathi Vajargah K, Shafie N. Quality assessment program-University curriculum (curriculum for adult education). J Curriculum Stud. 2007;2(5):first page-final page.
[7]Arefi M. Of curricula in higher education in the field of education and strategies for improvement (case study: major in educational management) [dissertation]. Tehran: Tarbiat Modarres University; 2004.
[8]Arefi M. Of curricula in higher education in the field of education and strategies for improvement (case study: major in educational management) [dissertation]. Tehran: Tarbiat Modarres University; 2004.
[9]Arefi M. Of curricula in higher education in the field of education and strategies for improvement (case study: major in educational management) [dissertation]. Tehran: Tarbiat Modarres University; 2004.
[10]Banisi P, Karimi AA, Shahraki Poor H. Pedagogy of the new millennium. Tehran: Metacognitive Thinking Publications; 2005.
[11]Attaran M. Context of education reform. Tehran: Smart Schools Publications; 2004.
[12]Azer SA. Problem-based learning in the fifth, sixth and seventh grades, assessment of student perception. Teaching Teach Educ. 2009;25(8):1033-42.
[13]Vernon DT, Blake RL. Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Acad Med. 1993;68(7):550-63.
[14]Copland MA. Problem-based leadership development: developing the cognitive and skill capacities of school leaders. In: Hallinger P. editor. Reshaping the landscape of school leadership development: A global perspective. London: Taylor and Francis; 2005.
[15]Serajy F, Attaran M, Naderi E, Ali Asgari M. Designe of a virtual university curriculum. J Curriculum Stud. 2007;5(issue):first page-final page.
[16]Creswell J, Clark C. A combination of research methods. Khamosh Sara'i JAR. (Translator). Tehran: Hooman; 2010.
[17]Jonson A, Mattheos N Svingby G, Attstrom R. Dynamic Assessment & the Interactive Examination. Educ Technol Soc. 2007;10(4):17-27.
[18]Carvalho GF, Kirch DP. A problem-based MBA curriculum: The Ohio University experience. Mid-Am J Bus. 1986;11(2):9-18.
[19]Hillen H, Scherpbier A, Wijnen W. History of problem-based learning in medical education. Lessons from problem-based learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.
[20]Creswell J, Clearwater C. A combination of research methods. Family Name? Name? (Translator). Tehran: Publication?; 2011.
[21]Azar A, Faraji H. Fuzzy Management Science. Tehran: Mehraban Nashr; 2007.
[22]Barghi I. Application of Van Maanen’s phenomenology viewpoint in curriculum development studies. Instruct Strateg Q. 2010;4:137-41.