Integrating ICT into Higher Education: A Study of Onsite vs Online Students' Perceptions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT For the past two decades, information and communication technologies (ICT) have transformed the ways professors teach and students learn. The purpose of this study is to investigate the perceptions of onsite students (hybrid or blended mode) and of those taking the same courses on the Internet (online mode). To guide the study, a moderator-type theoretical research model was developed, out of which nine hypotheses were formulated. The model was tested in a field experiment. To collect data, we used a multimethod approach, that is, a Web survey involving open- and closed-ended questions. The sample was formed of 313 onsite and online students from eight undergraduate and graduate courses offered at the Faculty of Administration of a large Canadian university. The quantitative data analysis was performed using a structural equation modeling software, that is, Partial Least Squares (PLS); the qualitative data were analyzed following a thematic structure using QSR NVivo. In this paper we present a summary of the quantitative results (closed-ended questions) supported and enriched by the qualitative results of the students (open-ended questions). INTRODUCTION For the past two decades information and communication technologies (ICT) have transformed the ways professors teach and students learn. Some professors have actively shifted the information flow from a face-to-face mode (student listening, onsite presence) to an entirely online mode (student reading, onsite non presence); that is, they have designed courses and curricula offered completely online using the Internet and the Web. Others have developed the hybrid or blended mode (a combination of face-to-face and online activities; less student onsite presence, ongoing use of ICT both inside and outside the classroom). Hence, knowledge acquisition and dissemination have been reconceptualized, and new methods developed in order to satisfy the rapidly evolving needs of a population of individuals in search of more knowledge, more and more heterogeneous, in a geographically distributed environment. In today's global economy, organizations (including universities) who want to survive and strive to stay highly competitive must continually innovate at the human, material, and technological levels. Alavi and Leidner (2001) pointed out that, during the past decade, universities and corporate training facilities have at an increasing rate invested into ICT to improve education and training. Marshall (2002) added that actual classrooms are more and more enriched by technology. Further, Giddens (1999) argued that one of the more important functions of the university is to allow people to play a significant role in today's new economy. Thus, universities, faculties, and professors are currently looking for ways to improve teaching and curricula, as well as develop new modes capable of satisfying the actual and future needs of organizations and societies. Out of their recursive attempts, the four fundamental questions often revisited are the following: (1) What are we teaching? (2) What should we be teaching? (3) What is the best way to teach it (pedagogy)? and (4) What are the impacts on students? The study described in this paper aims at helping universities to stay highly competitive in the current global shift in higher education, an approach that is innovative in its exploration of new directions as regards the last two above-mentioned questions related to pedagogy and student impact. We examine the relation between students' learning outcomes (undergraduate and graduate students) and learning environments integrating ICT. Specific relations between student onsite presence and student online presence are examined as to identify their effect on the basic relation between learning environments and students' learning outcomes. In particular, this study compares onsite technology-rich hybrid or blended learning environments and online learning environments. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».