پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 41 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 1,105 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,457 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 17,062,846 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,959,388 |
Blended Learning in Distance Education: A Comparative Study of Selected Mega Open Universities | ||
| Quarterly of Iranian Distance Education Journal | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 1، شماره 1، مهر 2018، صفحه 9-24 اصل مقاله (184.43 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: scientific-research | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| Farhad Seraji* | ||
| Associate Professor of Curriculum, Bu-Ali Sina University | ||
| چکیده | ||
| The main purpose of this research is to explore various countries experiences about developing blended learning system in distance education universities. Blended learning, as a third wave in developing learning environment, has become commonplace after the resident and e-learning environments in universities. The goal of this movement is improving learning qualities, extending the boundaries of education and decreasing educational costs. In this study, a qualitative approach and a comparative method were used. The qualitative method was used to understand the social contexts of distance education universities and comparative approach was applied to compare universities in terms of observable categories. Among 17 distance mega universities in the world, four universities, including Indirah Gandhi National Open University in India, Anadulu Open University in Turkey, Open University of China (OUC), and Alberta Open University in Canada were selected using purposeful sampling. The data collecting tool consisted of a checklist that was prepared with emphasis on 10 categories of social and cultural features of the countries including general situation of public and higher education, distance education, policies related to blended learning, learning management system, content development and presenting method, learning activities and resources, support system, interaction systems, teaching and assessment method, and evaluation system of learning quality. The required data were also collected through note taking procedure from sites of universities and related articles and books. For data collection and analysis, George Brody's four-step method (Description, Interpretation, Proximity, and Comparison) was used. At first, required data was gathered from articles, university web sites, and interaction with informed people through note taking. Next, data were interpreted after continuous review with regard to university social and cultural contexts. In the third stage, data was organized and categorized based on similarity and differences and then were compared. Results showed that each four universities uses British open university framework in organizational structure. Each university included blending learning in their system based on their polices. Along with self-learning textual content, the universities started providing electronic content and designing learning activates with using ICT possibilities, while the Athabasca University emphasizes on individual and group learning activities. In each four universities, using educational TV as a learning aid is common place. Support services system in each university is Commensurate with social and cultural conditions. Online synchronous and asynchronous teaching is part of teaching activities in each university, but its quality is different. Learning assessment in different in four universities, but formative and summative evaluations are emphasized in all universities. Quality assurance system in Athabasca and OUC is based on PLAR, in Anadolu University based on the Bologna scheme, and in Indirah Gandhi, based on Council of Higher Education. In this research, for developing blended learning in Payame Noor University, a framework is provided at the end. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Distance Education؛ Blended Learning؛ Quality Assurance؛ Components؛ Comparative Study | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| یادگیری ترکیبی در آموزش از دور: مطالعه تطبیقی چند دانشگاه منتخب | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| فرهاد سراجی | ||
| دانشیار برنامه ریزی درسی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| دف این پژوهش بررسی تجارب کشورهای مختلف در زمینه کیفیت بخشی به نظام آموزش ترکیبی است. یادگیری ترکیبی به عنوان موج سوم محیطهای یادگیری، بعد از محیطهای حضوری و الکترونیکی در دانشگاهها و سازمانهای آموزشی مرسوم شده است که هدف عمده آن بهبود کیفیت یادگیری، بسط دامنه پوشش و کاهش هزینههاست. رویکرد پژوهش کیفی و روش آن مطالعه تطبیقی بوده است که از بین هفده دانشگاه از دور مگا(میلیونی) چهار دانشگاه آناتولی ترکیه، ایندیرگاندی هند، اویوسی چین و آلبرتای کانادا را به عنوان نمونههای هدفمند انتخاب کرده است. مقولههای مورد مشاهده و بررسی در این دانشگاهها شامل ساختار دانشگاه، سیاستها و راهبردها، سامانه مدیریت یادگیری، تهیه محتوا، فعالیتها و منابع یادگیری، شیوه تدریس و ارزشیابی، پشتیبانی آموزشی و نظام ارزشیابی کیفیت آموزشی دانشگاهها بوده است. برای جمع آوری و تحلیل داده-های از روش چهار مرحلهای توصیف، تفسیر، همجواری و مقایسه جرج برودی استفاده شده است. یافتهها نشان میدهد هر چهار دانشگاه از لحاظ ساختار سازمانی از الگوی دانشگاه باز انگلستان پیروی میکنند و دارای پردیس مرکزی، مراکز منطقهای و واحدهای منطقهای هستند. هر چهار دانشگاه بر اساس سیاستهای خاص و مطابق سندهای سیاستی به سمت الکترونیکی سازی آموزش و یادگیری ترکیبی پیش رفتهاند. دانشگاههای مورد مطالعه در کنار محتوای خودآموز متنی، اقدامات گستردهای برای الکترونیکی سازی محتوا و طراحی فعالیتها انجام دادهاند که در این زمینه دانشگاه آلبرتا از لحاظ تاکید بر فعالیتهای یادگیری فردی و گروهی با سه دانشگاه دیگر تفاوت دارد. هر چهار دانشگاه برای تدارک منابع یادگیری غنی و در دسترس از تلویزیون آموزشی استفاده میکنند. نظام پشتیبانی در هر چهار دانشگاه متناسب با شرایط فرهنگی – اجتماعی مخاطبان تدارک دیده شده است و در دانشگاه ایندیرا به دلایل مختلف استقبال از حمایتها و پشتیبانیهای فنی و آموزشی ضعیفتر است. در دانشگاههای مورد مطالعه تدریس و تعاملات حضوری بین دانشجویان و مدرسان در واحدهای منطقهای انجام میشود. تدریس-های همزمان آنلاین توسط استادان برجسته و راهنماییهای ناهمزمان توسط راهنماهای آنلاین انجام میشود. شیوههای ارزشیابی در دانشگاهها متفاوت است، ولی در همه دانشگاه بخشی از نمره ارزشیابی به ارزشیابیهای تکوینی و بخشی دیگر به ارزشیابیهای پایانی اختصاص مییابد. نظام ارزشیابی کیفیت در دانشگاه آناتولی بر اساس طرح بولونیا، در دانشگاه ایندیرا با توجه به تصمیم-های شورای عالی کیفیت آموزشی هند و در دانشگاههای او یوسی و آلبرتا بر اساس طرح PLAR انجام میشود. یادگیری ترکیبی راهبردی است که هر دانشگاه متناسب با اهداف، شرایط و مخاطبان خود آن را شکل میدهد. در پایان بر اساس تجارب دانشگاههای مورد مطالعه طرح پیشنهادی برای توسعه یادگیری ترکیبی در دانشگاه پیام نور ایران ارائه شده است. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| دانشگاه از دور, یادگیری ترکیبی, ارزشیابی کیفیت, مولفهها, مطالعه تطبیقی | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] S.Bocconi& G. Trentin, G. Modelling blended solutions for higher education: teaching, learning and assessment in the network and mobile technology era. Educational Research and Evaluation. (2014), 20(7-8), 516-535,DOI: 10.1080/13803611. 2014.99636.
[2] C.J.Bonk,& C.R. Graham (Eds.). Handbook of blended learning: Global Perspectives, local designs. SanFrancisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing. (2012). P, 211- 214.
[3] R. Garrett . The State of Open Universities in the Commonwealth: A Perspective on Performance, Competition and Innovation. Burnaby, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning. (2016). Retrieved from: http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/2048/2016-_Garrett_State-of-Open-Universities.pdf
[4] J.T. Holden & P. J. Westfall. Developing a blended learning strategy: An instructional media perspective. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, (2010), 24(1), 16-23.
[5] B.H. Khan. Learning features in an open, flexible, and distributed environment. AACE Journal, (2005), 13(2), 137-153.
[6] S. Scepanovic., V. Guerra & M. Lübcke. Impact of Technological Advancement on the Higher Education Curriculum and Program Development. In Andragogical and Pedagogical Methods for Curriculum and Program Development. IGI Global. (2014). P. 362-381.
[7] D.R. Garrison & N. D. Vaughan (2007). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.
[8] P.Shea (2007) Towards a conceptual framework for learning in blended environments. In A. G. Picciano and C. D. Dziuban (Eds.), Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, 19–35. Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium.
[9] Kress, G., &Selander, S. Multimodal design, learning and cultures of recognition. The Internet and Higher Education, 2012, 15(4), P. 265-268.
[10] L. E. Margulieux ., K.R. Bujak ., W.M. McCracken and D.M. Majerich. Hybrid, Blended, Flipped, and Inverted: Defining Terms in a Two Dimensional Taxonomy. Paper accepted to the 12th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Education, Honolulu, HI, 2014. January 5-9.
[11] R. Murphy., E. Snow., J. Mislevy., L. Gallagher., A. Krumm&X. Wei. Blended learning report. Michael & Susan Dell Foundation. (2014). P 152- 163.
[12] R. DeChambeau. Mixed-Mode Course Design and Delivery. In Authentic Instruction and Online Delivery. CreateSpace. (2011).P 72-74.
[13] H. Shahhoseni., F. Narengi Sani., R. Ebadi& M. Roodbari. Evaluating quality of teaching and learning services in higher education. Journal of Library and Information Science, (2015), 77, 277- 330.
[14]R.Mohhammadi.,T. Zafaripoor., F.Sadegmandi&M.Zamanifar. Accreditation and quality assurances in higher distance education: Review of models and process. Journal of educational evaluation and measurement studies, (2014), 4(2), 95-137.
[15] P. Harris., J. Connolly& L. Feeney. Blended learning: overview and recommendations for successful implementation. Industrial and Commercial Training, (2009), 41(3), 155-163.
[16]N.Mirriahi,, A. Dennis and F. Bob. "A blended learning framework for curriculum design and professional development." Research in Learning Technology (2015), 23(1).
[17] F. Seraji. Modes and process of e-learning curriculum development in anadolu, allameeqbal and open university of malsia .biquarterly Journal of higher education currciculum. (2012). 1(3). 28-49. [18] F. Seraji & S.Safari. Developing blended learning in Iranian banks: stepstoward quality improving or escape from the requirements of e-learning. Journal of training and human resources development, (2015). 4(2), 17-38. [19] C.R. Graham., W. Woodfield&J.B. Harrison. A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education.Internet and Higher Education.2013, doi:10.1016/j.iheduc. (2012).09.003.
[20]B. Johnson, L. Christensen. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage; (2008).P. 203-216.
[21] A. Madandar Arani. Comparative research in education: implementation of new research method. Journal of family and research. (2015), 12(2), P. 69-89.
[22] D.A.S. Moumita. Innovation In Open And Distance Learning System: The Ignou Experience. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 2013, 14(3). P. 23-31.
[23] S.Lama. Community Radio for ODL in KKHSOU, Assam State, India. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 2012, 10(1),P, 37-50.
[24] K.F.Perris. Online learning in the Open University systems of India and China: A comparison of responses to globalization (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto). (2012).
[25] L.S. Kumar& B.L. Fozdar. Course Evaluation: A Holistic Approach. Indian Journal of Open Learning, (2009), 18(2), 63-76.
[26] M.I. Farisi, M. OER onthe Asian Mega Universities: Developments, Motives, Openness, and Sustainability. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, (2013), 14(1) 78-90.
[27] T.Bansal., S. Chabra& D. Joshi. Current Initiatives and Challenges to OERs in Indian Higher Education. Asian Journal of Distance Education. (2013), 11(1), 4-18.
[28] A.K. Dimri& A. Chaturvedi. Analysis with Learner Input of Student Support Services in India. Asian Journal of Distance Education, (2010).7(2), 4-9.
[29] S. Mirja& S.P. Singh. Effectiveness of Student Support Services Provided by Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU). Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, (2014), 5(26), 124- 135.
[30] A.Trivedi &K. Gupte,. Quality Issues for Counselling in Open and Distance Learning in India. Asian Journal of Distance Education, (2010). 8(2), P, 50-58.
[31] Ö .Çakır., & E. Oğuz. Situations of distance education institutions in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, (2010). 9, 1722-1730.
[32] H.H. Halac&A. Cabuk,. Open courseware in design and planning education and utilization of distance education opportunity: Anadolu University experience. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, (2013). 14(1) P.15-22.
[33] J.Jung. Innovative Practices of Distance Education (including e-Learning) in Asia and the Pacific. International Journal for Educational Media and Technology.2007. 1(1), P. 48-60.
[34] M. Firat. E-Learning tools and ICT usage of open and distance education students. Journal of Technology and Information Education, (2017). 9(1), P. 99-111.
[35] K. Çekerol& Ö. Öztürk,. Bologna process and Anadolu University open education system. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. (2012). 64, P. 275-283.
[36] E. Demiray & S. Curabay. Organizational Commitment of Anadolu University Open Education Faculty Students. International Journal of Social Sciences.2008. 3(4), P. 17-29.
[37]C. Latchem. Quality matters for Turkish higher education. Anadolu Journal of Edcuational Sciences International. (2011). 1(1) P. 1-18.
[38] X. Ding., J. Niu ., & Y. Han. Research on distance education development in China. British Journal of Educational Technology. (2010). 41(4), P, 582-592.
[39] C .Li, ., L. Shiyuan., & Z. Qinhua. Opportunities and Challenges of Chinese Distance Education in the" Internet+" Era. Modern Distance Education Research. (2016). 1(4), P. 24-46.
[40] H. Ding., &R. M. Boody. Reasons Why Students attend Open University in China. Asian Journal of Distance Education. (2011), 9(2)P. 56-70.
[41J.Jung. Innovative Practices of Distance Education (including e-Learning) in Asia and the Pacific. International Journal for Educational Media and Technology. (2007), 1(1), P, 48-60.
[42] F.Li,. M. Zhou.., & B. Fan, B. Can distance education increase educational equality? Evidence from the expansion of Chinese higher education. Studies in Higher Education. (2014), 39(10),P, 1811-1822.
[43] I. Jung., T.M. Wong., C. Li., S. Baigaltugs, & T. Belawati. Quality assurance in Asian distance education: Diverse approaches and common culture. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. (2011), 12(6), P. 63-83.
[44] D. Abrioux. athabasca University, Canada Developments since 2003. In Susan D’antoni. The Virtual University: Models and Messages, lessons from Case studies. UNESCo Editions. (2006).
[45] R. Garrett.The State of Open Universities in the Commonwealth: A Perspective on Performance, Competition and Innovation. Burnaby, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning. 2016. Retrieved from http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/2048/2016_Garrett_State-of-Open- Universities.pdf.
[46] G. Siemens., D. Gašević., & S.Dawson. Preparing for the digital university: A review of the history and current state of distance, blended, and online learning. (2015).
[48] P. MacKinnon. The future is now. Report of the Presidential Task Force on Sustainability. Athabasca University. 2015. Retrieved from http://albertapolitics.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/2015- sustainability.pdf.
[49] T.Anderson,.The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.).Athabasca University Press. (2008). P, 218- 232.
[50] R.M. Bernard. E. Borokhovski. R.F. Schmid, R.M. Tamim. & P.C. Abrami. A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: from the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, (2014), 26(1).P, 87-122.
[51] S. Bocconi&G. Trentin, G. Modelling blended solutions for higher education: teaching, learning and assessment in the network and mobile technology era. Educational Research and Evaluation, (2014), 20. P, 7-8. 516-535,DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2014.99636.
[52]A. Lane, A. Widening participation in higher education through Open Educational Resources. In A. Okada, T. Connolly & P.J. Scott (Eds.), Collaborative Learning 2.0: Open Educational Resources. Hershey: IGI Global. (2012). P, 1-15.
[53] D.Volchok., G. Caines. Continuous Assessment for Improved Student Outcomes: Examples from WebCTs Exemplary Course Project. In: S. Howell., M. Hricko. On line Assessment and Measurement: Case Studies from Higher Education, k-12 and Corporate. London: Information Science Publishing. (2006). P, 12-34.
[54] R.McGreal., T. Anderson. & D. Conrad. Open Educational Resources in Canada. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 2015. 16(5). P 46-57.
[55] B.Spencer. Defining prior learning assessment and recognition. Encyclopaedia of adult education. (2005). P, 502-508. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,911 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,440 |
||