4.7 Article

Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors

期刊

COMPUTERS & EDUCATION
卷 51, 期 1, 页码 318-336

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.009

关键词

blended learning; collaborative learning; post-secondary education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships of the students' perceived levels of collaborative learning, social presence and overall satisfaction in a blended learning environment. This research studied the relationship of these three variables and identified critical factors related to them. The participants were 48 graduate students who took a blended-format course in health education and worked on a collaborative group project related to the development of a comprehensive HIV-AIDS prevention plan. Data was collected from the Student Perception Questionnaire and face-to-face interviews. The analysis of quantitative data indicated that student perceptions of collaborative learning have statistically positive relationships with perceptions of social presence and satisfaction. This means that students who perceived high levels of collaborative learning tended to be more satisfied with their distance course than those who perceived low levels of collaborative learning. Similarly, students with high perceptions of collaborative learning perceived high levels of social presence as well. Surprisingly, the relationship between social presence and overall satisfaction was positive but not statistically significant. Interview data revealed that (a) course structure, (b) emotional support, and (c) communication medium were critical factors associated with student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence, and satisfaction. Explanations about findings and implications for instructional design are discussed in the conclusion. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据