learning - Academic Conferences Limited
learning - Academic Conferences Limited learning - Academic Conferences Limited
Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et al. Martínez, M.J.; Juan, A.A.; Castan, J. (2010). “Using the Critical Incident Technique to Identify Factors of Service Quality in Online Higher Education”. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector, 2(4), 57-72. Mason, J. & Brunning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: what the research tell us. University of Nebraska-Lincoln: http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html Mory, E. H. (2004). “Feedback research revisited”. A D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on Educational Communications and Technology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 745-785. Narciss, S. (2004). “The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and achievement in concept learning”. Experimental Psychology, 51(3), 214-228. Narciss, S. (2008). “Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks”. A J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. Narciss, S., Körndle, H., Reimann, G. & Müller, C. (2004a). Feedback-seeking and feedback efficiency in web-based learning– How do they relate to task and learner characteristics? A. P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, & R. Joiner (Eds.), Instructional design for effective and enjoyable computer- supported learning. Proceedings of the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers (pp. 377-388). Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center. Narciss, S. & Huth, K. (2004b). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. A H. M. Niegemann, R. Brünken & D. Leutner (Eds.), Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning (pp. 181-195). Münster: Waxmann. Narciss, S. & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16(4), 310-322. Van Merriënboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (Aect). New Jersey (EUA): Lawrence Erlbaum. Rice, M., Mousley, J & Davis, R. (1994). “Improving student feedack in distance education: a research report”. A T. Evans & D. Murphy (Eds.), Research in distance education (pp. 52-62). Geelong (Austràlia): Deaking University Press. 464
Evaluation of Multimedia Tools and e-Feedback in Virtual Learning Environments Maria-Jesús Martínez-Argüelles 1 , Marc Badia-Miro 2 , Carolina Hintzmann 1 and Dolors Plana-Erta 1 1 Economia i Empresa, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain 2 Departament Història Econòmica, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain mmartinezarg@uoc.edu mbadia@ub.edu chintzmann@uoc.edu dplana@uoc.edu Abstract: There is a high consensus that one of the key elements to ensure knowledge attainment in a virtual university context is the existence of regulatory processes of learning, which allows students to regularly evaluate their learning process. In asynchronous learning environments one of the usual strategies to facilitate this regulation is the use of feedback mechanisms between the student and tutor. But in the environment of large groups of students written personalized feedback may be too laborious for the tutor. In this paper we present a pilot project focusing on the context of Degree in Business Administration from the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. We have explored ICT tools to give feedback (audio, video and screenshots). The aim is to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the learning regulatory process. During one semester the project was implemented by taking a virtual classroom with a reduced number of students in specific subjects using alternative ways to written feedback. In order to evaluate the effects of using these alternative multimedia tools, the results obtained have been compared with the other benchmark groups taking into account the following aspects: academic results, assessment of students, evaluation of tutors, and hours of dedication of tutors. The implementation of the pilot test and evaluation of results have allowed to draw some conclusions about the conditions under which the use of multimedia tools in feedback may in fact help the adjustment process in virtual learning. Keywords: feedback, virtual learning, ICT, personal feedback in large groups 1. Introduction In the framework of the implementation of new degrees to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), the student becomes the protagonist of his/her learning process, which carries out by fulfilling learning activities. In order to ensure that the student really attains the competencies associated to each subject, the function of accompaniment and personalised relationship between tutor and learner becomes a priority. The UOC is a totally virtual university. One of the basic characteristics of its educative pattern is to encourage a range of continuous evaluation activities to every subject that is part of the diverse learning programs. The underlying idea is that the student attains the competencies inherent to each subject by carrying out the different proposed activities. These continuous evaluation activities are called Continuous Evaluation Tests (PAC, for its acronym in Catalan). We call them tests as they also serve to assess how the students are performing on a continued basis and to check if they attain progressively the learning aims that are previewed. These PACs are, therefore, the axis of the student’s work. Furthermore, as they are evaluated systematically and rigorously, they become the most direct and automatic channel for the student to receive a clear information on whether he/she is attaining the foreseen goals or not, as well as the mistakes he/she is making and what he/she is lacking. Nevertheless, one of the aspects of the UOC’s learning model that the students have missed most in recent years is the absence of a personalised feedback to the continuous evaluation activities they have submitted (Martínez, M.J.; et al (2010)). Taking as starting point the definition of the concept of feedback given by Susanne Narciss in her multiple scientific works (Narciss, S. (2004, 2008) and Narciss, S. & Huth, K. (2004, 2006)), this study is focussed on the semantic and structural dimension of feedback. 465
- Page 440 and 441: Stephanie Linek and Klaus Tochterma
- Page 442 and 443: Social Networks, eLearning and Inte
- Page 444 and 445: Birgy Lorenz et al. 135 students p
- Page 446 and 447: Birgy Lorenz et al. The experts' st
- Page 448 and 449: Birgy Lorenz et al. Akdeniz, Y. (19
- Page 450 and 451: Arno Louw programmes, and within th
- Page 452 and 453: Arno Louw It should be clearly stat
- Page 454 and 455: Arno Louw somewhat an unwritten con
- Page 456 and 457: Arno Louw Lecturers assume that le
- Page 458 and 459: A treasure hunt has to be done to f
- Page 460 and 461: How to Represent a Frog That can be
- Page 462 and 463: Robert Lucas Occasionally we will a
- Page 464 and 465: Robert Lucas Note the need to creat
- Page 466 and 467: Robert Lucas Figure 5: A model of a
- Page 468 and 469: Learning by Wandering: Towards a Fr
- Page 470 and 471: Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes wa
- Page 472 and 473: Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes Th
- Page 474 and 475: Marie Martin and Michaela Noakes is
- Page 476 and 477: Linda Martin et al. across the sect
- Page 478 and 479: Linda Martin et al. confidence. Alt
- Page 480 and 481: 8. Conclusion Linda Martin et al. T
- Page 482 and 483: Personalized e-Feedback and ICT Mar
- Page 484 and 485: Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et
- Page 486 and 487: Source: Own elaboration from survey
- Page 488 and 489: Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et
- Page 492 and 493: 1.1 Semantic dimension Maria-Jesús
- Page 494 and 495: 2. Methodology Maria-Jesús Martín
- Page 496 and 497: Maria-Jesús Martínez-Argüelles e
- Page 498 and 499: Maria-Jesús Martínez-Argüelles e
- Page 500 and 501: David Mathew members of staff frigh
- Page 502 and 503: David Mathew disclose this informat
- Page 504 and 505: David Mathew baboon smells the wate
- Page 506 and 507: Peter Mikulecky framing learning, p
- Page 508 and 509: Peter Mikulecky inhabitants or work
- Page 510 and 511: Acknowledgements Peter Mikulecky Th
- Page 512 and 513: Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
- Page 514 and 515: Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
- Page 516 and 517: Karen Hughes Miller and Linda Leake
- Page 518 and 519: An Analysis of Collaborative Learni
- Page 520 and 521: 2.3 Flexible and accessible learnin
- Page 522 and 523: 3.1 Definition of case study Peter
- Page 524 and 525: Peter Mkhize et al. Basically, soci
- Page 526 and 527: Peter Mkhize et al. you’ve got yo
- Page 528 and 529: Ideas for Using Critical Incidents
- Page 530 and 531: Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean I
- Page 532 and 533: Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean o
- Page 534: Jonathan Moizer and Jonathan Lean M
Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et al.<br />
Martínez, M.J.; Juan, A.A.; Castan, J. (2010). “Using the Critical Incident Technique to Identify Factors of Service<br />
Quality in Online Higher Education”. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector,<br />
2(4), 57-72.<br />
Mason, J. & Brunning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: what the research tell us.<br />
University of Nebraska-Lincoln: http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html<br />
Mory, E. H. (2004). “Feedback research revisited”. A D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on Educational<br />
Communications and Technology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 745-785.<br />
Narciss, S. (2004). “The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and achievement<br />
in concept <strong>learning</strong>”. Experimental Psychology, 51(3), 214-228.<br />
Narciss, S. (2008). “Feedback strategies for interactive <strong>learning</strong> tasks”. A J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. Narciss,<br />
S., Körndle, H., Reimann, G. & Müller, C. (2004a). Feedback-seeking and feedback efficiency in web-based<br />
<strong>learning</strong>– How do they relate to task and learner characteristics? A. P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, &<br />
R. Joiner (Eds.), Instructional design for effective and enjoyable computer- supported <strong>learning</strong>. Proceedings<br />
of the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with<br />
Computers (pp. 377-388). Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.<br />
Narciss, S. & Huth, K. (2004b). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia <strong>learning</strong>. A H. M.<br />
Niegemann, R. Brünken & D. Leutner (Eds.), Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning (pp. 181-195).<br />
Münster: Waxmann.<br />
Narciss, S. & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a<br />
computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16(4), 310-322.<br />
Van Merriënboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and<br />
Technology (Aect). New Jersey (EUA): Lawrence Erlbaum.<br />
Rice, M., Mousley, J & Davis, R. (1994). “Improving student feedack in distance education: a research report”. A<br />
T. Evans & D. Murphy (Eds.), Research in distance education (pp. 52-62). Geelong (Austràlia): Deaking<br />
University Press.<br />
464
Change language