رابطه راهبردهای یادگیری خود‌تنظیمی و گرایش به تفکر انتقادی با میزان آمادگی دانشجویان برای حضور در دوره های آموزش الکترونیکی

محورهای موضوعی : فن‎آوری اطلاعات

عزت‌اله قدم‌پور‌ ¹ (استادیار گروه روان‌شناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم‌آباد، ایران)
پیمان کامکار ² (کارشناس ارشد تکنولوژی آموزشی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران)
هوشنگ گراوند ³ (دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم‌آباد، ایران)
سجاد جمشیدی کیا ⁴ (کارشناس ارشد تکنولوژی آموزشی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1392/09/03 تاریخ پذیرش : 1393/02/24 تاریخ انتشار : 1393/08/10

کلید واژه: راهبردهای یاگیری خودتنظیمی, گرایش به تفکر انتقادی, آمادگی برای حضور در دوره های الکترونیکی,

چکیده مقاله :

یکی از عواملی که می‌تواند، باعث موفقیت یا شکست در استفاده از آموزش الکترونیکی شود، آمادگی دانشجویان برای حضور در دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی است. از جمله عواملی که می‌تواند، بر آمادگی دانشجویان برای حضور در چنین دوره‌هایی اثرگذار باشد، راهبردهای یادگیری خودتنظیمی و گرایش به تفکر انتقادی است. بر این اساس، هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی رابطه راهبردهای یادگیری خود‌تنظیمی و گرایش به تفکر انتقادی با میزان آمادگی دانشجویان برای حضور در دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی می‌باشد. روش پژوهش، توصیفی- همبستگی بود. جامعه آماری، شامل کلیه دانشجویان دانشگاه خوارزمی در سال 1392 بود. از میان جامعه با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی ساده، 250 نفر به ‌عنوان نمونه انتخاب شدند. به منظور جمع‌آوری داده‌ها از پرسش‌نامه‌های گرایش به تفکر انتقادی ریکتس و راهبردهای یادگیری خودتنظیمی و مقیاس آمادگی ورودی یادگیرنده به دوره‌های الکترونیکی استفاده شد. به منظور تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها از آمار توصیفی (میانگین، انحراف استاندارد) و استنباطی (آزمون‌های همبستگی، رگرسیون و t مستقل) استفاده شد. نتایج نشان داد که میزان همبستگی بین راهبردهای یادگیری خودتنظیمی و آمادگی برای حضور در دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی 0/23 (با ضریب تعیین 0/50) و بین گرایش به تفکر انتقادی و آمادگی برای حضور در دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی 0/24 (با ضریب تعیین 0/70) می‌باشد و می‌توان، از طریق راهبردهای یادگیری خودتنظیمی و گرایش به تفکر انتقادی، آمادگی دانشجویان برای حضور در دوره‌های الکترونیکی را پیش‌بینی کرد. نتایج آزمون t مستقل نشان داد بین دانشجویان دختر و پسر و دانشجویان کارشناسی و تحصیلات تکمیلی از لحاظ میزان آمادگی برای ورود به دوره‌های آموزش الکترونیکی تفاوت معناداری وجود ندارد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

One of the factors that can cause success or failure in using e-learning is students' readiness to participate in e-learning courses. Among the factors that could be effective in readiness of students to participate such e-learning courses are self-regulated learning strategies and tendency to critical thinking. Thus, the aim of the study was to investigate the role of self-regulated learning strategies and tendency to critical thinking in students' readiness to participate in e-learning courses. The research method was descriptive-correlational. The statistical population included all students of Kharazmi University in 2013. Using random sampling method, 250 individuals were selected as sample. To collect the data, the Ricketts' tendency to critical thinking and self-regulated learning strategies questionnaires, as well as students' readiness to participate in e-learning scale were used. Descriptive (mean, standard deviation) and inferential (correlation, regression and independent t tests) statistics were used for data analysis. The results showed that the correlation of self-regulated learning strategies with students' readiness to participate in e-learning was 0.23 (R2= 0.05) and of critical thinking with students' readiness to participate in e-learning courses is 0.24 (R2= 0.07). So students' readiness to participate in e-learning courses can be predicted through self-regulated learning strategies and tendency to critical thinking. Results of t test showed that there was no significant difference between male and female, as well as graduate and undergraduate students in terms of readiness to participate in e-learning courses.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Andone, L., & Sireteanu, N-A. (2009). Strategies for technology-based learning in higher education. The FedUni Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 31-42.


2. Artino, A. R., & Stephens, J. M. (2006). Learning online: Motivated to self regulate? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(4), 176-182.


3. Atreja, A., Mehta, N. B., Jain, A. K., Harris, C. M., Ishwaran, H., Avital, M., et al. (2008). Satisfaction with web-based training in an integrated health care delivery network: Do age, education, computer skills and attitudes matter? BMC Medical Education, 8, 48.


4. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students' conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1&2), 87-111.


5. Berry, C. A. (1992). Pervious learning experiences strategy beliefs and task definition in self-regulated foreign language learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 318-336.


6. Blake, C., & Scanlon, E. (2007). Reconsidering simulations in science education ata distance: Features of effective use. Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET).


7. Cleary, T. J., & Chen, P. P. (2009). Self-regulation, motivation, and math achievement in middle school: Variations across grade level and math context. Journal of School Psychology, 47, 291-314.


8. Granlund, R. (2001). Web-based micro-world simulation for emergency management training. Future Generation Computer Systems, 17, 561-572.


9. Granlund, R., Berglund, E., & Eriksson, H. (2000). Designing web-based simulation for learning. Future Generation Computer Systems, 17, 171-185.


10. Grison, D., & Anderson, T. (2008). E-Learning in 21th century: A framework for research and practice. (Translated by Zareii Zavaraki & Safaei Movahed). Tehran: Science and Tactics. (in Persian).


11. Halpern, D. F. (1999). New direction for teaching and learning, teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. USA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.


12. Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2005). Review of the 2005 HEFCE Strategy  for E-Learning. A report to HEFCE by Glenaffric Ltd, London.


13. Horton, W., & Horton, K. (2003). E-learning Tools and Technologies (First Edition). Wiley Publishing


14. Huang, R. T. (2009). Factors that influence online learner’s intent to continue in anonline graduate program. Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University. Retrieved from http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-04152009-120528/unrestricted/ Huang_dis.pdf.pdf


15. Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education. (2011). Unpublished Statistics for October 2011. Center for Statistics and Informatics.


16. Jia, H., Wang, M., Ran, W., Yang, S. J. H., Liao, J., & Chiu, D. K. W. (2011). Design of a performance-oriented workplace e-learning system using ontology. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(4), 3372-3382.


17. Kadivar, P. (2001). Examine the contribution of self-efficacy, autonomy, intelligence, academic achievement of students in order to provide a model for optimal learning. Tehran: Education Institute. (in Persian).


18. Kareshki, H. (2008). The role of Motivational patterns and perceptions of environmental in self-regulation learning at third grade high school students in Tehran. Master's Thesis, Tehran University, Faculty of Psychology and Education. (in Persian).


19. Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Rutledge Publication.


20. Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers & Education, 48, 185-204.


21. Lim, D. H. (2002). Perceived differences between classroom and distance education: Seeking instructional strategies for learning application. International Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1).


22. Lim, D. H., & Kim, H. J. (2003). Motivation and learner characteristics affecting online learning application. Journal of Educational Technology, 31(4), 423-39.


23. Liu, S. H., Liao, H. L., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education, 53, 599-607.


24. Lyutykh, E. (2009). Practicing critical thinking in an educational psychology classroom. Journal of the American Educational Studies Association, 45(4), 377-391.


25. Masoumi, D., & Lindström, B. (2010). Quality in e-learning: A framework for promoting and assuring quality in virtual institutions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(1), 27-41.


26. Mazini, N., & Rostaminejad, M. (2010). Drop engineering students in electronic education: A case study of e-learning center of Science and Technology University. Journal of Education of Engineering, 12(45), 91-103. (in Persian).


27. McManus, T. F. (2000). Individualizing instruction in a Web based hypermedia learning environment: Non-linearity, advance organizers, and self- regulated learners. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(3), 219-251.


28. Miliszewska, L., & Rhema, A. (2010). Towards e-learning in higher education in Libya. Informing Science and Information Technology, 7(1), 423-437.


29. Mosalanejad, L., & Sajanian, S. (2008). Evaluation of critical thinking in e-learning & traditional students of computer field. Journal of Center of Studies and Development of Medical Education, 5(2), 127-134. (in Persian).


30. Newman, D. R., & Emerson, P. J. (1997). The on-line referendum: A tool for voting, conflict resolution and decision-making. In R. Alton-Scheidl, R. Schmutzer, Sint P. P., & Tschertau G. (Eds.), Voting, Rating, Annotation Web4Groups and other projects: Approaches and first experiences. (OCG-Bd.104, pp. 131-46). Vienna-Munich: R. Oldenbourg and Austrian Academy of Sciences.


31. Oztekin, A., Kong, Z. J., & Ozgur, U. (2010). UseLearn: A novel checklist and usability evaluation method for eLearning systems by criticality metric analysis. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(4), 455-469.


32. Pakdaman, A. (2007). Comparing self-regulated learning strategies in e-learning and face to face education. Journal of Educational Management, 1(2), 37-64. (in Persian).


33. Pakmehr, H., & Dehghani, M. (2011). The relationship between critical thinking and self-efficacy beliefs in Teacher Training students. Article collection of Tenth Congress of Iranian Curriculum Studies Association, 1-2 March 2011. Tehran: Rajaei Teacher Training University. (in Persian).


34. Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2003). The Virtual Student. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


35. Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners' decision to dropout or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207-217.


36. Paul, R. (1989). Critical thinking in North America: A new theory of knowledge, learning and literacy. Argumentation, 3, 197-235.


37. Phye, G. D. (1987). Handbook of academic learning: Construction of knowledge. USA: Academic press.


38. Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44, 90-103.


39. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: The Guilford Press.


40. Seraji, F., & Yarmohamadi, M. (2010). Preparation and validation of measurement instruments of in students' readiness to participate in e-learning courses. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1(3), 135-157. (in Persian).


41. Sharifi, Kh. (2007). The relationship between critical thinking and self-esteem and students’ academic Achievement. Master's Thesis in Faculty of Literature and Humanities of Mashhad, Payam Noor University. (in Persian).


42. Smeltzer, S., Bare, B., Brunner, L., & Suddarth, D. (2005). Text Book of Medical Surgical Nursing, (10th ed.). Williams & Wilkins, Lippincott.


43. Smolle, J., Prause, G., & Smolle-Jüttner, F. M. (2007). Emergency treatment of chest trauma- an e-learning simulation model for undergraduate medical students. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 32, 644-647.


44. Stefanou, C. R. (2001). Creating contexts for motivation and self-regulative learning in the collage classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 12(2), 19-32.


45. Thompson, L. F., Meriac, J. P., & Cope, J. G. (2002). Motivating online performance. Social Science Computer Review, 20(2), 149-160.


46. Tinnerman, L. S. (2006). A comparative study between traditional anddistance education instructional environment involving two graduate level learning disabilities class. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 3(4), 31-42.


47. Wall, J., & Ahmed, V. (2008). Use of a simulation game in delivering blended lifelong learning in the construction industry: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1383-1393.


48. Watkins, R., Leigh, D., & Triner, D. (2004). Assessing readiness for e-learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(4), 66-79.


49. Whipp, J. L., & Chiarelli, S. (2004). Self-regulation in a web- based course: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 522.


50. Young, K. A. (2003). Building a profile of the young web-based learner. Retrieved 12 June, 2009, from www.sage.com