Integrating ICT into Higher Education: A Study of Onsite vs Online Students' Perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".