Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.21608/jdlol.2022.225615
A. Adewoyin, A. Ebabhi
Lagos ABSTRACT Distance learners play prominent roles in any online learning environment. The ability of the learners to harness technological tools into the traditional learning environment brings about efficiency in Open and Distance Learning. The factors that influence learners' level of satisfaction in the distance learning environment are critical to open and distance education success. The domain of this study lies in two randomly selected Open and Distance Learning institutions in southwest Nigeria. A sample of 100 learners was randomly selected from each institution, making a total of 200 participants. Data was collected using a validated structured questionnaire. The learners' ability, responses, and satisfaction were analysed using descriptive analysis based on Moore's transactional distance theory. Generally, all the independent variables had means between 3.16 3.50. Results showed that learners prefer web-based learning, which helps them manage their time compared to face-to-face learning. E-learning facilitates learning in ODL, which also leads to effective time management that enhances teaching and learning; learners are well satisfied with the flexible characteristics of ODL, which makes education more accessible. However, it is recommended that tuition loans should be provided for learners of ODL institutions. This will immensely contribute to the nation's development, add value to human lives, and reduce the number of drop-outs resulting from varying crises in society.
{"title":"E-learning Environment and Learners' Satisfaction- The Learners' View","authors":"A. Adewoyin, A. Ebabhi","doi":"10.21608/jdlol.2022.225615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21608/jdlol.2022.225615","url":null,"abstract":"Lagos ABSTRACT Distance learners play prominent roles in any online learning environment. The ability of the learners to harness technological tools into the traditional learning environment brings about efficiency in Open and Distance Learning. The factors that influence learners' level of satisfaction in the distance learning environment are critical to open and distance education success. The domain of this study lies in two randomly selected Open and Distance Learning institutions in southwest Nigeria. A sample of 100 learners was randomly selected from each institution, making a total of 200 participants. Data was collected using a validated structured questionnaire. The learners' ability, responses, and satisfaction were analysed using descriptive analysis based on Moore's transactional distance theory. Generally, all the independent variables had means between 3.16 3.50. Results showed that learners prefer web-based learning, which helps them manage their time compared to face-to-face learning. E-learning facilitates learning in ODL, which also leads to effective time management that enhances teaching and learning; learners are well satisfied with the flexible characteristics of ODL, which makes education more accessible. However, it is recommended that tuition loans should be provided for learners of ODL institutions. This will immensely contribute to the nation's development, add value to human lives, and reduce the number of drop-outs resulting from varying crises in society.","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86394332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2043738
C. Douce
Welcome to the second 2022 issue of Open Learning. The unofficial theme for this issue is: evaluations and case studies. Evaluations within open and distance learning are, of course, fundamentally important. This issue presents a number of papers that conduct evaluations in different ways. Evaluations can be used to assess what works and what does not, to determine whether improvements in practice or design help students, or understand the application and usefulness of theory. The first paper in this issue by Prifti (2022) is entitled ‘self–efficacy and student satisfaction in the context of blended learning courses’. The paper presents an interesting literature review. It addresses themes such as self-efficacy, student satisfaction and blended learning. Self-efficacy is a concept that can be considered not only in terms of how a student views themselves, but also in relation to the tools that are used, such as learning management systems. Whilst Prifti’s paper is primarily an empirical paper which uses a survey methodology, it is a theoretical paper too, exploring what can be meant by blended learning, whilst at the same time exposing the topic of student digital literacy. An interesting contribution lies in its presentation of a conceptual model, which posits links between self-efficacy and course satisfaction, also suggesting the importance of topics such as platform content, platform accessibility and critical thinking. These topics, in themselves, represent some of the many different variables that can influence the student experience. One point to note is that the term accessibility can often be used to refer to different issues. In Prifti’s study, accessibility is defined as ‘how comfortable students were with using the online platform’ rather than how usable a tool, product or set of services might be for students who have disabilities, or how available something is to a group of users who may be faced with disadvantages. Differences in terminology aside, a key point to take away from this paper is the important and obvious reflection that the technology (or tools) which students use can and do influence their experience. Close attention to the operation of learning management tools, accompanying technology, and the materials they deliver is important, and necessary. The next paper in this issue, by Yu and Watson (2022) also adopts a survey method. Rather than exploring a blended learning context, they explore MOOC learners and aim to ‘identify subtypes of attitudinal learning’ to carry out a ‘latent profile analysis’. In addition to the survey methodology, another similarity with the first paper lies in the study of learner attitudes. Their extensive literature review is split into two parts: a discussion of MOOC learner profiles, and an interesting discussion about the broad concept of attitudinal learning, which can be considered from a number of different perspectives. A particularly interesting aspect of the literature review is the
{"title":"Editorial: exploring evaluations and case studies","authors":"C. Douce","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2043738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2043738","url":null,"abstract":"Welcome to the second 2022 issue of Open Learning. The unofficial theme for this issue is: evaluations and case studies. Evaluations within open and distance learning are, of course, fundamentally important. This issue presents a number of papers that conduct evaluations in different ways. Evaluations can be used to assess what works and what does not, to determine whether improvements in practice or design help students, or understand the application and usefulness of theory. The first paper in this issue by Prifti (2022) is entitled ‘self–efficacy and student satisfaction in the context of blended learning courses’. The paper presents an interesting literature review. It addresses themes such as self-efficacy, student satisfaction and blended learning. Self-efficacy is a concept that can be considered not only in terms of how a student views themselves, but also in relation to the tools that are used, such as learning management systems. Whilst Prifti’s paper is primarily an empirical paper which uses a survey methodology, it is a theoretical paper too, exploring what can be meant by blended learning, whilst at the same time exposing the topic of student digital literacy. An interesting contribution lies in its presentation of a conceptual model, which posits links between self-efficacy and course satisfaction, also suggesting the importance of topics such as platform content, platform accessibility and critical thinking. These topics, in themselves, represent some of the many different variables that can influence the student experience. One point to note is that the term accessibility can often be used to refer to different issues. In Prifti’s study, accessibility is defined as ‘how comfortable students were with using the online platform’ rather than how usable a tool, product or set of services might be for students who have disabilities, or how available something is to a group of users who may be faced with disadvantages. Differences in terminology aside, a key point to take away from this paper is the important and obvious reflection that the technology (or tools) which students use can and do influence their experience. Close attention to the operation of learning management tools, accompanying technology, and the materials they deliver is important, and necessary. The next paper in this issue, by Yu and Watson (2022) also adopts a survey method. Rather than exploring a blended learning context, they explore MOOC learners and aim to ‘identify subtypes of attitudinal learning’ to carry out a ‘latent profile analysis’. In addition to the survey methodology, another similarity with the first paper lies in the study of learner attitudes. Their extensive literature review is split into two parts: a discussion of MOOC learner profiles, and an interesting discussion about the broad concept of attitudinal learning, which can be considered from a number of different perspectives. A particularly interesting aspect of the literature review is the ","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46368491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-23DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2056008
Jessica E. Carr
{"title":"Teaching in a digital age – second edition","authors":"Jessica E. Carr","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2056008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2056008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42978149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-16DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2042229
Lesley Fearn
{"title":"Transforming Teacher Education with Mobile Technologies","authors":"Lesley Fearn","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2042229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2042229","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48161776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2033114
Maria A. Perifanou, A. Economides
ABSTRACT Open Educational Resources (OER) could be used by educators and learners for online teaching and learning. All over the world, various OER repositories and directories curate OER in various subjects. However, little is known about their quality, popularity and usage. This paper investigates and analyses qualitatively and quantitatively 13 well-known repositories of OER (ROER) from the users’ point of view. The following web traffic analytics tools were used: Google MobileFriendly, Google PageSpeed Insights, OpenLink Profiler, SimilarWeb, and WAVE. Most of these ROER curate OER and links pointing to OER of multiple types, multiple languages, multiple disciplines (subjects), and multiple educational levels. Also, almost all of them provide mobile friendly design, some form of OER quality evaluation, and facilities so that anyone can search them for OER and their members can interact, communicate, and collaborate among themselves. However, most of them provide poor speed and their information about their OER does not always correspond to the reality. Most of these ROER have registered members and social media followers, and are well recognised by thousands of websites that point to them. Thousands of users visit these ROER. On average, visitors visit 3.6 pages and spend 2.6 minutes per visit in an ROER. .
{"title":"Measuring quality, popularity, demand and usage of Repositories of Open Educational Resources (ROER): a study on Thirteen popular ROER","authors":"Maria A. Perifanou, A. Economides","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2033114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2033114","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Open Educational Resources (OER) could be used by educators and learners for online teaching and learning. All over the world, various OER repositories and directories curate OER in various subjects. However, little is known about their quality, popularity and usage. This paper investigates and analyses qualitatively and quantitatively 13 well-known repositories of OER (ROER) from the users’ point of view. The following web traffic analytics tools were used: Google MobileFriendly, Google PageSpeed Insights, OpenLink Profiler, SimilarWeb, and WAVE. Most of these ROER curate OER and links pointing to OER of multiple types, multiple languages, multiple disciplines (subjects), and multiple educational levels. Also, almost all of them provide mobile friendly design, some form of OER quality evaluation, and facilities so that anyone can search them for OER and their members can interact, communicate, and collaborate among themselves. However, most of them provide poor speed and their information about their OER does not always correspond to the reality. Most of these ROER have registered members and social media followers, and are well recognised by thousands of websites that point to them. Thousands of users visit these ROER. On average, visitors visit 3.6 pages and spend 2.6 minutes per visit in an ROER. .","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43159606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-12DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2026213
Meina Zhu
{"title":"Designing and delivering MOOCs to motivate participants for self-directed learning","authors":"Meina Zhu","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2026213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2026213","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44600934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2021.2014801
C. Douce
Welcome to the first 2022 issue of Open Learning. I do hope that readers enjoyed the previous issue, Volume 36, Issue 3 which explored Open voices on COVID-19: covid challenges and opportunities driving the research agenda. I do expect themes relating to distance learning and the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to feature within future issues, as the impact of the dramatic change in practice will continue to be evaluated and studied for some time. This issue touches upon important and related themes, such as the structures and models of organisations, inclusion, and the importance of professional development. The first paper in this issue is by Seale et al. (2021). Their paper has a title which asks a question: One model to rule them all, one model to bind them? A critique of the use of accessibility-related models in post-secondary education. Accessibility, in this context, is about ensuring equal access to learning for students with disabilities. It is also concerned with considering and then removing barriers. Accessibility has the potential to be improved through the delivery of services to students, and through the application of information and communication technology (ICT) to enable students to gain access to educational resources and participate within educational activities. To understand how to provide, develop or improve accessibility within higher educational institutions (including distance learning providers) a number of different models (or frameworks) have been proposed. Seale et al. (2021) ask three related questions: ‘1. What alternatives to the Universal Design model exist? 2. How do we differentiate between different accessibility models? 3. Do we need more than one model to inform accessibility practice?’ They go on to define models as being ‘practical or conceptual representations of the systems and processes within PSE [post-secondary education] that are required to promote the use of supportive ICTs that contribute to successful education and employment outcomes for disabled students’. A critical assessment of nine accessibility models lies at the heart of their paper. These models take account of the perspectives of different stakeholders, such as university faculty, assistive technology providers, staff developers and senior managers. I found the section about staff development both important and interesting, where it emphasised the development of accessible practice and organisational culture change. This paper represents a contribution to the debate about how best to develop and provide support for students with disabilities. Whilst reading their paper, it may be helpful to keep in mind the question of how the provision of accessibility could be enhanced within an institution. The different models that Seale et al. present outline different perspectives and considerations. It may also be helpful to consider practices at different levels: practice at the micro level, meso level and macro level. It is also useful to com
{"title":"Perspectives on models and professional development","authors":"C. Douce","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2021.2014801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2021.2014801","url":null,"abstract":"Welcome to the first 2022 issue of Open Learning. I do hope that readers enjoyed the previous issue, Volume 36, Issue 3 which explored Open voices on COVID-19: covid challenges and opportunities driving the research agenda. I do expect themes relating to distance learning and the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to feature within future issues, as the impact of the dramatic change in practice will continue to be evaluated and studied for some time. This issue touches upon important and related themes, such as the structures and models of organisations, inclusion, and the importance of professional development. The first paper in this issue is by Seale et al. (2021). Their paper has a title which asks a question: One model to rule them all, one model to bind them? A critique of the use of accessibility-related models in post-secondary education. Accessibility, in this context, is about ensuring equal access to learning for students with disabilities. It is also concerned with considering and then removing barriers. Accessibility has the potential to be improved through the delivery of services to students, and through the application of information and communication technology (ICT) to enable students to gain access to educational resources and participate within educational activities. To understand how to provide, develop or improve accessibility within higher educational institutions (including distance learning providers) a number of different models (or frameworks) have been proposed. Seale et al. (2021) ask three related questions: ‘1. What alternatives to the Universal Design model exist? 2. How do we differentiate between different accessibility models? 3. Do we need more than one model to inform accessibility practice?’ They go on to define models as being ‘practical or conceptual representations of the systems and processes within PSE [post-secondary education] that are required to promote the use of supportive ICTs that contribute to successful education and employment outcomes for disabled students’. A critical assessment of nine accessibility models lies at the heart of their paper. These models take account of the perspectives of different stakeholders, such as university faculty, assistive technology providers, staff developers and senior managers. I found the section about staff development both important and interesting, where it emphasised the development of accessible practice and organisational culture change. This paper represents a contribution to the debate about how best to develop and provide support for students with disabilities. Whilst reading their paper, it may be helpful to keep in mind the question of how the provision of accessibility could be enhanced within an institution. The different models that Seale et al. present outline different perspectives and considerations. It may also be helpful to consider practices at different levels: practice at the micro level, meso level and macro level. It is also useful to com","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42815462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2022.2028363
W. Diehl, Jeonghyun Lee, Farahnaz Soleimani, Stephen W Harmon, Eunkyoung Lee, Stella Y. Kim, Tuba Gezer, J. Rincón, M. Vila, Rick L. Shearer, Rebecca E. Heiser, S. Jagannathan, Meina Zhu
{"title":"The American Journal of Distance Education TOC","authors":"W. Diehl, Jeonghyun Lee, Farahnaz Soleimani, Stephen W Harmon, Eunkyoung Lee, Stella Y. Kim, Tuba Gezer, J. Rincón, M. Vila, Rick L. Shearer, Rebecca E. Heiser, S. Jagannathan, Meina Zhu","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2022.2028363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2028363","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45988727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-26DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2021.2019577
C. Lange
ABSTRACT Cognitive processing issues online may be reduced through e-learning personalisation, which allows learners to address individual learning needs by controlling how they process information. While some research shows that e-learning personalisation may actually complicate information processing under specific circumstances, this study examines whether it can be successful over the course of an entire semester. Survey responses from a group of university students taking massive online learning classes in South Korea (n = 2,160) were analysed to investigate relationships involving e-learning personalisation and various elements of cognitive load. Results showed that as e-learning personalisation levels increased, negative aspects of cognitive load decreased. These results support cognitive load reduction strategies in ways that traditional lectures replicated in online environments cannot.
{"title":"The relationship between e-learning personalisation and cognitive load","authors":"C. Lange","doi":"10.1080/02680513.2021.2019577","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2021.2019577","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cognitive processing issues online may be reduced through e-learning personalisation, which allows learners to address individual learning needs by controlling how they process information. While some research shows that e-learning personalisation may actually complicate information processing under specific circumstances, this study examines whether it can be successful over the course of an entire semester. Survey responses from a group of university students taking massive online learning classes in South Korea (n = 2,160) were analysed to investigate relationships involving e-learning personalisation and various elements of cognitive load. Results showed that as e-learning personalisation levels increased, negative aspects of cognitive load decreased. These results support cognitive load reduction strategies in ways that traditional lectures replicated in online environments cannot.","PeriodicalId":46089,"journal":{"name":"Open Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46903933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：