learning - Academic Conferences Limited

3. Discussion
Jana Dlouhá et al.
Qualitative feedback is more appropriate for courses such as MPG&SD. It provided information about
prior knowledge of the course topic, detailed feedback on eLearning tools, course content, discussion
topics, workload, and satisfaction with students’ own performances. Regarding evaluation of trained
skills and competences, we can identify the following items as what students perceived they gained:
language skills (English – all students were non-native speakers), writing (by creating their own wiki
article, developing the proper formal structure of an article, use of citations and references, a true
peer review process, communication: discuss and consider other opinions, and time management.
Looking at students’ open comments on course quality we can again find mostly positive reactions
like: “In total I really liked this course and I am happy that I participated in it. This course I really found
fun to handle. Hope to participate in other course like it.” The last comment was elicited from a
specific statement: “I would recommend this course to my colleagues/fellow students.” Eight students
agreed, while 4 of the 12 provided no response. Critical opinions also appeared. The intellectual
demands of the course were perceived as high. In addition, the whole course was seen as too timeconsuming
and sometimes deadlines were not 100% clear. Nevertheless, the positive reaction to the
course environment resulted in a unanimous appreciation of the tutors’ involvement, which is always
crucial for the creation of a well-functioning eLearning course.
Other researchers combine the results of an analysis of learning approaches with other analytical
tools focused on students’ reactions to teaching. This is only possible when a certain number of
students is analyzed. For example, Noel Entwistle, Velda McCune and Jenny Hounsell (2002) report
on research that looks for relationships between approaches to studying and the teaching-learning
environment carried out within several courses. They find the concepts and categories used to
describe general differences in studying to be a valuable analytical framework that allows
consideration of how individuals study and shows how various aspects of a teaching-learning
environment may affect student engagement in the course. Thus, the effects of the teaching-learning
environment, as perceived by the students, in terms of their deep approach to it might be assessed to
a certain extent. In addition, students’ perceptions of a particular course might be compared with their
general approach to studying, so that a pedagogical effect would be indicated. These authors
concluded that the ETLQ questionnaires are working effectively and are able to detect changes in
approaches to studying depending on changes in course design aimed at enhancing teachinglearning
environments to support high-quality learning, or compare the responses of students who
had first-hand experience of the innovation with those who had not.
In general, the deep studying approach should result in good quality outcomes and academic
performance (Entwistle et al., 2000; Duff, 2003). We have not overestimated the results of the
evaluation of on our course with a limited number of participants due to which we were not able to
proceed with a deeper statistical analysis; we have simply presented feedback on possible evaluation
tools that could be used for the assessment of social learning processes that give educational
outcomes different to those achieved in traditional HE settings.
4. Conclusion – the applied social learning concept in an eLearning course
The HE course presented as a case study is a model of the applied concept of social learning in
eLearning. In the MPG&SD course, students had to learn from the social environment with the
support of an electronic environment. The manner of involvement should follow the principles of (and
communication in) the academic community in general; the teaching method used and the eLearning
environment selected were mediators of the educational aims. The eLearning environment was
flexible enough to provide the options required, and, moreover, it provided evidence so that the
learning processes could be researched in different stages, as the work of the students was
continuously documented. Evidence of participants’ contributions in the forum discussion space
provided the opportunity to observe the social aspects of scientific work and the principles of
academic dialogue – the roles of participants in the dialogue, the distribution of authority, possibilities
of communication across boundaries, the added value of a multicultural environment, etc. The
research dimension was highlighted in an eLearning environment that makes external evaluation
possible.
Some of explorations undertaken and experiences obtained would not be possible without the
multicultural and interdisciplinary learning environment that was achieved within the VCSE
174