Studying the Various Types of Interaction in the e-learning environment with Learning Quality in Virtual Campuses
Subject Areas : Research in Curriculum PlanningIsa Ebrahimzadeh 1 , Marjan Masoomifard 2
1 - Associate Professor of distance education, Department of educational sciences, Payam-e- Noor University, Iran
2 - Assistant Professor of distance education, Department of educational sciences, Payam-e- Noor University, Iran
Keywords: learning quality, virtual campus, interaction, distance education,
Abstract :
The aim of this research is to investigate the relationship between various types of interaction and learning quality in virtual campuses. This research is descriptive-correlation and has been done through survey procedures. Subjects of the survey are M.A students of all virtual campuses of Tehran University among which 385 students were selected through simple random sampling and answered to the questionnaire provided by the researcher. The findings were analyzed through descriptive and deductive statistical methods. Results of the Pearson Correlation Coefficient test shows that there exists a direct and meaningful relation between the quality of various types of interactions (instructor-student, student-student, student-content, instructor-instructor, instructor-content, content-content) and learning quality in virtual campuses. Furthermore, results of the Freedman test, which was used for classifying various types of interaction, showed that "student-student" interaction and "content-content" interaction are the most and the least important interactions among others. Accordingly, as the types of interaction increases in universities and campuses, the assurance and motivation of students develop and this would lead to deeper and more meaningful learning with the highest quality.
- Djoudi, M. (2009). Experiences de e-learning dans les Universities Algerienns. Conference international sur l, informatique et ses Application, CIIA09, Saida, 3-4 mai.
- Khan, B. (1997). Web-Based Instruction (WBI): what is it and why is it? In B. Khan (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp. 5–19). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
- Kearsley, G. (2000). Online education: learning and teaching in cyberspace. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Cavanaugh, J.K. (2005). Are online courses cannibalizing students from existing course?. Journal of asynchronous learning network, 9 (3). Available at: http://www.sloance.org/publications/jaln/v9n3/v9n3_cavanaugh.asp
- Fozdar, B.I. & Kumar, L.S. (2006). Teaching chemistry at indirect at Indira Gandhi National Open University. Journal of asynchronous learning network, 9 (1). Available at: http://www.sloance.org/publications/jaln/u9n1/v9n1_bourne.asp
- Allen E. and Seaman J.(2008). Staying the course: online education in the United States 2008, The Sloan Consortium. Babson Survey Research Group,Available-at:-http://www.sloanc.org/publications/survey/pdf/staying_the_course.
- Betts K (2009). Online Human Touch (OHT) Training & Support: A Conceptual Framework to Increase Faculty Engagement, Connectivity,and Retention in Online Education, Part 2. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol. 5, No. 1.
- Garrison, D. R, Anderson, T (2003). E - learning in the 21st century: A frame work for research and practice, London: Routledge/Falmer.
- Molaeian, S (2012). Ways of interaction in e-learning. Web magazine, No. 139. Pp63-66 [Persian].
- Anderson, T, Alumi,F (2001). "E-learning from theory to practice", Translated by Zamani & Azimi (2007). Tehran, smart school publication [Persian].
