Advertisement

Research on Potential Features to Enhance On-line Course Materials for Student Revision

  • Petch SajjacholapuntEmail author
  • Mike Joy
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 739)

Abstract

Providing online course materials on the course website has become standard practice in most institutions. These materials are intended to support students’ study after class and especially revision before an examination. Most students download and print out these online materials uploaded by teacher, which reduces the advantages of being online. Besides which, students sometimes suffer from the stress of revising a large amount of material. Maximising the potential of these online materials as an alternative method of revision is a challenge in the area of technology enhanced learning. To address this issue and overcome the challenge, we have developed the self-revision electronic course materials framework (SRECMATs) that features direct access to specific materials through keyword browsing and keyword searching, allowing users to gain a quick overview of extracted keywords along with easy access to related materials. This feature restructures the uploaded materials and delivers intelligent online materials for students. The first prototype was developed and launched for a Design of Information Structures module in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Warwick. This paper evaluates the proposed framework in order to assess student satisfaction, understand students’ perceptions of using the system prototype, and understand whether or not the developed features are appropriate for practical use.

Keywords

Online materials management Online materials design Course management system Student revision 

References

  1. 1.
    Entwistle, N.J., Entwistle, A.: Contrasting forms of understanding for degree examinations: the student experience and its implications. High. Educ. 22(3), 205–227 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Entwistle, N., Entwistle, D.: Preparing for examinations: the interplay of memorising and understanding, and the development of knowledge objects. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 22(1), 19–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Woloshyn, V.E., Pressley, M., Schneider, W.: Elaborative-interrogation and prior-knowledge effects on learning of facts. J. Educ. Psychol. 84(1), 115 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sajjacholapunt, P., Joy, M.S.: Exploring patterns of using learning resources as a guideline to improve self-revision, pp. 5263–5271 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sajjacholapunt, P., Joy, M.: Analysing features of lecture slides and past exam paper materials towards automatic associating E-materials for self-revision. In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2015), Scitepress (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nicol, D., Littlejohn, A., Grierson, H.: The importance of structuring information and resources within shared workspaces during collaborative design learning. Open Learn. J. Open Distance e-Learn. 20(1), 30–49 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Forsyth, I.: Teaching and Learning Materials and the Internet. Routledge, London (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., Wyse, D.: A Guide to Teaching Practice. Routledge, London (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Orey, M.: Emerging Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Technology. CreateSpace, North Charleston (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carr, N.: Author Nicholas Carr: The Web Shatters Focus, Rewires Brains, vol. 24. Wired magazine, San Francisco (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ricardo, B.Y., Berthier, R.N.: Modern Information Retrieval: The Concepts and Technology Behind Search, vol. 84, 2nd edn. Addision Wesley, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Jong, T.: Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought. Instr. Sci. 38(2), 105–134 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salton, G., Buckley, C.: Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Inf. Process. Manage. 24(5), 513–523 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sweller, J.: Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cogn. Sci. 12(2), 257–285 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mclntosh, C. (ed.): Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 4th edn. Ernst Klett/Sprachen, Stuttgart (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Quesenbery, W.: What does usability mean: looking beyond ease of use. Ann. Conf. Soc. Tech. Commun. 48, 432–436 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Faculty of Humanities Study Skills, University of Manchester. Revision Strategies. http://www.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/studyskills/assessment evaluation/assessment/revision strategies.html.
  18. 18.
    Student Learning Development, University of Leicester. Revision and exam skills. http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ld/resources/study/revision-exam
  19. 19.
    University of Oxford. Revision and examinations. https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/revision?wssl=1
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    The University Study Advisers, University of Reading. Planning your revision. www.reading.ac.uk/internal/studyadvice/StudyResources/Exams/sta-planningrevision.aspx
  22. 22.
    Student Support, University of Bath. Exams and revision. http://www.bath.ac.uk/students/support/academic/exams/

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.Faculty of Information and Communication TechnologyMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations