Comparing the Effectiveness of Computer-Based and Computer-Assisted Instructional Methods on the Interaction of the Elements of Instruction Learning Process

Moradi Mokhles, Hossein; Zaraii Zvaraki, Esmaeil; Rashidi, Hassan

doi:10.22054/jep.2017.8143

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

¹ Assistant Professor, Department of Instructional Technology, Sayyed Jamaleddin Asadabadi University, Hamadan, Iran, e-mail: mokhles@sjau.ac.ir.

² Associate Professor of Educational Psychology, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran, e-mail: ezaraii@yahoo.com

³ Associate Professor of Computer, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran, e-mail: hrashi@atu.ac.ir

https://doi.org/10.22054/jep.2017.8143

Abstract

This study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of computer-based and computer-assisted instruction on the interaction of the elements of Teaching-Learning process in the second grade of the first secondary school science class in Asadabad. The study is part of the quasi-experimental projects that uses pre-test and post-test experimental groups 1 and 2. The statistical population of the study included all the male students in second grade of high school in the school year 2013-14 in Asadabad- Hamedan, with the volume of 852 students. Multi-stage cluster sampling was used to select the sample. The sample size was 100 students that were placed in pre-test and post- test groups 1 and 2. The first group studied the instructional CD with teacher guidance and the second group studied the instructional CD without teacher guidance. Both groups received their instruction in the network environment with the NSS software support. The research instrument included students’ interaction levels based on six interaction elements with 60 questions in Likert scale (very high, high, medium, low, very low). The multivariate analysis of covariance was used to test the hypotheses. The results suggest that in Teaching-Learning elements’ interaction that include six dimensions, there is no significant difference between computer-based and computer-assisted instruction in five dimensions except in content-content dimension in significance level %5. The findings show that computer-assisted instruction, the training and simulation activities with the guidance provided by the network and teacher is more effective compared to computer-based instruction.

Keywords

References

پورجمشیدی، مریم. (1392). تعیین عوامل مؤثر بر تعامل در آموزش مبتنی بر وب و ارائه الگوی مناسب جهت بهبود آن. دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، رساله دکتری جهت اخذ دکتری تخصصی (Ph.D) در رشته تکنولوژی آموزشی.

حسینی، ر و کاردان، ا. (1392). تأثیر پویائی سطح دشواری محتوا بر توالی‌بخشی قطعات آموزشی با استفاده از انتگرال فازی چوکت و نظریۀ پرسش-پاسخ. مجموعه مقالات سومین کنفرانس بین المللی و ششمین کنفرانس ملی آموزش و یادگیری الکترونیکی. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.

زارعی زوارکی، ا و سیدی نظرلو، ط. (1392). سنجش میزان تعامل در برنامۀ درسی الکترونیکی دانشگاه صنعتی خواجه نصیرالدین طوسی. فصلنامه اندازه گیری تربیتی. 4(11):164-147.

شهامت، ف؛ کدیور، پ و فرزاد، و. (1387). سبک‌های شناختی و خود- تنظیمی در محیط یادگیری به کمک رایانه و مقایسه آن با محیط‌های سنتی. فصلنامه تعلیم و تربیت. 24(94): 58 – 41.

فردانش، هاشم. (1383). مبانی نظری تکنولوژی آموزشی. تهران: سمت.

گریسون، دی و اندرسون، تری. (2000). یادگیری الکترونیکی در قرن 21، ترجمه اسماعیل زارعی زوارکی و سعید صفایی. تهران: علوم و فنون.

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational research, 79(3), 1243-1289.

Chou, C. (2003). Interactivity and interactive functions in web‐based learning systems: a technical framework for designers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 265-279.

Dennen*, V. P. (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education, 26(1), 127-148.

Gillingham, P. (2009). Ghosts in the machine: Student participation and grade attainment in a web‐assisted social work course. Social work education, 28(4), 423-435.

Hawisher, G. E., & Pemberton, M. A. (1998). Writing across the curriculum encounters asynchronous learning networks. Electronic communication across the curriculum, 17-39.

Hirumi, A. (2002). A framework for analyzing, designing, and sequencing planned elearning interactions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 141-60.

Howard, J. R. (2002). Do college students participate more in discussion in traditional delivery courses or in interactive telecourses? A preliminary comparison. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 764-780.

Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (2000). A study of factors influencing students’ perceived learning in a web-based course environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4), 317-338.

Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in education and teaching international, 39(2), 153-162.

McGorry, S. Y. (2003). Measuring quality in online programs. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(2), 159-177.

Morrow, R. G. (2007). Interactivity in an online learning environment: A case study of participant experience in professional development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Griffith University, Brisbane.

Muirhead, B., & Juwah, C. (2005). Interactivity in computer-mediated college and university education: A recent review of the literature. Insights for Teachers and Students, 11.

Nipper, S.(1989). In Mind weave: Communication, computers and distance education, Third generation distance learning and computer conferencing, eds Mason R, Kaye A (Pergamon, Oxford, UK), pp 63–73.

Palmer, S., Holt, D., & Bray, S. (2008). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 847-858.

Song, H. (2004). The perceptions of college students regarding the instructional quality of online courses delivered via WebCT. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2141-2146). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Thurmond, V. A& Wambach, K. (2004). Understanding interactions in distance education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(1). Pp. 9-26.

Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 5-13.

Comparing the Effectiveness of Computer-Based and Computer-Assisted Instructional Methods on the Interaction of the Elements of Instruction Learning Process

References

References

Volume 13, Issue 45October 2017Pages 41-57

Volume 13, Issue 45
October 2017
Pages 41-57