Advertisement

e-Pedagogical Practice Assessment in a Higher Education Comparative Context

  • Sayed Hadi SadeghiEmail author
  • Nigel Bagnall
  • Michael J. Jacobson
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 916)

Abstract

In this study the pedagogical understanding of e-practice in a higher education comparative context, using an Australian and an American institute was investigated. The theoretical framework focus was on e-learning practice in the area of pedagogy. The studied e-pedagogical sub variables were learner-centre interactivity, socio-communication, assessment, e-resources and e-Environment. Participants were postgraduate students, lecturers and staff engaged with online learning and teaching. Comparing the answers of Australians and Americans in the three levels of institute position showed that there were significant differences in evaluation of the e-pedagogical practice factor between Australian and American administrative staff, where Australians significantly evaluated the e-pedagogical practice factor higher than Americans. The results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) also revealed that there was significant difference in evaluation of the e-pedagogical practice factor between Australian and American lecturers indication that Americans evaluated this factor more significant than Australians. Moreover, an ANOVA test revealed that there was significant difference in evaluation of the e-pedagogical practice factor between Australian and American students, showing that American students evaluated this factor significantly higher than Australian students.

Keywords

E-learning Comparative context Pedagogical practice 

References

  1. 1.
    Sadeghi, S.H.: Pathology of Learning in Cyber Space: Concepts, Structures and Processes, Vol. 156. Springer (2018)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sadeghi, S.H.: Training in cyberspace. In: Pathology of Learning in Cyber Space. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, vol. 156. Springer, Cham (2019)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boud, D., Molloy, E.: Feedback in Higher and Professional Education: Understanding it and Doing it Well. Routledge (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cottrell, S., Donaldson, J.H.: Exploring the opinions of registered nurses working in a clinical transfusion environment on the contribution of e-learning to personal learning and clinical practice: Results of a small scale educational research study. Nurse Educ. Pract. 13(3), 221–227 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gerjets, P.H., Hesse, F.W.: When are powerful learning environments effective? The role of learner activities and of students’ conceptions of educational technology. Int. J. Educ. Res. 41(6), 445–465 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kala, S., Isaramalai, S.A., Pohthong, A.: Electronic learning and constructivism: a model for nursing education. Nurse Educ. Today 30(1), 61–66 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilkinson, A., Forbes, A., Bloomfield, J., Gee, C.F.: An exploration of four web-based open and flexible learning modules in post-registration nurse education. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 41(4), 411–424 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jacobson, M.J., Jacobson, M.J., Kim, Y., Lee, J., Kim, H., Kwon, S.: Learning sciences principles for advanced e-learning systems: implications for computer-assisted language learning. Multimed. Assist. Lang. Learn. 8(1), 76–115 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herrington, J., Oliver, R., Herrington, A. (2007). Authentic Learning on the Web: Guidelines. Flexible learning in an information society. 26--35Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thurmond, V.A.: Considering theory in assessing quality of web-based courses. Nurse Educ. 27(1), 20–24 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sadeghi, S.H.: E-Learning Practice in Higher Education: A mixed-method Comparative Analysis. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Masoumi, D.: Quality in E-learning in a Cultural Context: The case of Iran. Department of Education, Communication and Learning; Institutionen för pedagogik, kommunikation och lärande (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chickering, A.W., Gamson, Z.F.: Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bull. 3, 7 (1987)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Finger, G., Jamieson-Proctor, R., Watson, G.: Measuring learning with ICTs: an external evaluation of Education Queensland’s ICT curriculum integration performance measurement instrument. Paper to be presented at AARE. 5 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhou, Y.: Towards Capability Maturity Model of e-Learning Process (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paechter, M., Maier, B., Macher, D.: Students’ expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction. Comput. Educ. 54(1), 222–229 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rodríguez-Ardura, I., Meseguer-Artola, A.: E-learning continuance: The impact of interactivity and the mediating role of imagery, presence and flow. Inf. Manag. 53(4), 504–516 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chickering, A.W., Ehrmann, S.C.: Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. AAHE Bull. 49, 3–6 (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Phipps, R., Merisotis, J.: Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Education (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chou, C.: Interactivity and interactive functions in web-based learning systems: a technical framework for designers. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 34(3), 265–279 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Spitzberg, B.H., Hurt, H.T.: The measurement of interpersonal skills in instructional contexts. Commun. Educ. 36(1), 28–45 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Frymier, A.B.: Students’ classroom communication effectiveness. Commun. Q. 53(2), 197–212 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marshall, S.: eMM Version Two Process Assessment Workbook. Victoria Institute of Wellington, Wellington (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reeves, T.C., Reeves, P.M.: Effective dimensions of interactive learning on the World Wide Web. Web-based Instr. 59–66 (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raitman, R., Augar, N., Zhou, W.: Employing wikis for online collaboration in the e-learning environment: case study. In: Information Technology and Applications, ICITA, Third International Conference. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Achtemeier, S.D., Simpson, R.D.: Practical considerations when using benchmarking for accountability in higher education. Innov. High. Educ. 30(2), 117–128 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thompson, M.M., Braude, E., Canfield, C.D., Halfond, J., Sengupta, A.: Assessment of KNOWLA: knowledge assembly for learning and assessment. In: Proceedings of the Second. ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gáti, J., Kártyás, G.: Practice oriented higher education course definitions and processes. In: 5th International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics (ISCIII). IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wahlstedt, A., Pekkola, S., Niemelä, M.: From e-learning space to e-learning place. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 39(6), 1020–1030 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hostager, T.J.: Online learning resources do make a difference: mediating effects of resource utilization on course grades. J. Educ. Bus. 89(6), 324–332 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    FitzPatrick, T.: Key success factors of e-learning in education: a professional development model to evaluate and support e-learning. Online Submission (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sadeghi, S.H.: E-Learning Instructional design practice in American and Australian institutions. In: International Association for Development of the Information Society (2017)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sangrà, A.: A new learning model for the information and knowledge society: the case of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Spain. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 2(2) (2002)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ragin, C.C., Becker, H.S.: What is a Case?: Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge Institute Press (1992)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gomm, R., Hammersley, M., Foster, P.: Case Study Method: Key Issues, Key Texts (2000)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Flyvbjerg, B.: Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual. Inq. 12(2), 219–245 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sayed Hadi Sadeghi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nigel Bagnall
    • 1
  • Michael J. Jacobson
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations