Online or remote education? Preferences of Colombian higher education students

IF 2.4 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Contemporary Educational Technology Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI:10.30935/cedtech/13606
Carmen Ricardo, Camilo Vieira, Roxana Quintero-Manes, John Cano
{"title":"Online or remote education? Preferences of Colombian higher education students","authors":"Carmen Ricardo, Camilo Vieira, Roxana Quintero-Manes, John Cano","doi":"10.30935/cedtech/13606","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While some students had experience receiving online education prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the emergency remote modality offered a different experience given that higher education faculty had limited time for planning and, most of them, did not have any experience in online education. This research aims to identify the differences between undergraduate students’ perceptions and preferences on emergency remote and online education. Researchers identified a set of online education courses–that pre-existed COVID-19 times–and courses that were transformed into remote education courses–designed as a response of the COVID-19 emergency. Participants of this study are a group of students who, during the same academic semester, participated in both online and (emergency) remote courses. Researchers used a survey to understand students’ perceptions and preferences assessing their experiences in different dimensions (e.g., interaction and evaluation). Researchers used the add-on preferential groups model to identify which of the two modalities was preferred by the students for each dimension. The quantitative analysis was complemented using content analysis of responses to open-ended questions, seeking to gain a better understanding of students’ perceptions and preferences between online and emergency remote education. The results show that students have a positive view of the online and remote modalities; however, each of these modalities offers students advantages for specific dimensions. For example, the remote modality was preferred for having greater interaction among peers and with the instructor. On the other hand, online education provided more flexibility. Students suggested improving assessments’ approaches and instructors’ technological skills for both modalities.","PeriodicalId":37088,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Educational Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Educational Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13606","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While some students had experience receiving online education prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the emergency remote modality offered a different experience given that higher education faculty had limited time for planning and, most of them, did not have any experience in online education. This research aims to identify the differences between undergraduate students’ perceptions and preferences on emergency remote and online education. Researchers identified a set of online education courses–that pre-existed COVID-19 times–and courses that were transformed into remote education courses–designed as a response of the COVID-19 emergency. Participants of this study are a group of students who, during the same academic semester, participated in both online and (emergency) remote courses. Researchers used a survey to understand students’ perceptions and preferences assessing their experiences in different dimensions (e.g., interaction and evaluation). Researchers used the add-on preferential groups model to identify which of the two modalities was preferred by the students for each dimension. The quantitative analysis was complemented using content analysis of responses to open-ended questions, seeking to gain a better understanding of students’ perceptions and preferences between online and emergency remote education. The results show that students have a positive view of the online and remote modalities; however, each of these modalities offers students advantages for specific dimensions. For example, the remote modality was preferred for having greater interaction among peers and with the instructor. On the other hand, online education provided more flexibility. Students suggested improving assessments’ approaches and instructors’ technological skills for both modalities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在线教育还是远程教育?哥伦比亚高等教育学生的偏好
虽然一些学生在新冠肺炎大流行之前就有接受在线教育的经验,但鉴于高等教育教师的规划时间有限,而且他们中的大多数人没有任何在线教育经验,紧急远程模式提供了不同的体验。本研究旨在确定本科生对紧急远程教育和在线教育的感知和偏好之间的差异。研究人员确定了一套在线教育课程——早在新冠肺炎时代——以及转变为远程教育课程的课程——旨在应对新冠肺炎紧急情况。这项研究的参与者是一群在同一学期参加在线和(紧急)远程课程的学生。研究人员使用一项调查来了解学生的感知和偏好,从不同的维度(例如互动和评估)评估他们的经历。研究人员使用附加优惠组模型来确定学生在每个维度上更喜欢这两种模式中的哪一种。定量分析通过对开放式问题的回答进行内容分析来补充,试图更好地了解学生在在线教育和紧急远程教育之间的看法和偏好。研究结果表明,学生对在线和远程教学模式有积极的看法;然而,这些模式中的每一种都为学生提供了特定维度的优势。例如,远程模式更适合在同伴之间以及与教员之间进行更多的互动。另一方面,在线教育提供了更多的灵活性。学生们建议改进这两种模式的评估方法和教师的技术技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Educational Technology
Contemporary Educational Technology Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊最新文献
Design-based approach to technology innovation: Teacher educators’ experiences with tablets as instructional tools in South Africa Exploring the effectiveness of digital writing tools on Thai EFL students’ writing How will education look like in the future? School teachers’ perceived knowledge and affordances for using technology in teaching Enhancing mathematics education in the UAE: Elementary teachers’ views on distance education methods
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1