Educational Technology International

  • 제22권2호
  • /
  • Pages.199-225
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1598-5776(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2289-0300(eISSN)
한국교육공학회 (The Korean Society for Education Technology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perception of University Instructors for Designing Online Interactions: Findings from Importance-Performance Analysis

  • 투고 : 2021.08.31
  • 심사 : 2021.10.05
  • 발행 : 2021.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The aim of the current study was to suggest priorities needed to be considered by university instructors when designing online learning. Based on three types of interactions (learner-content, learner-instructor, and learner-learner interactions) for effective online learning (Moore, 1989), draft questionnaires representing each type of interaction were written. After examining content validity by two Ph.D. experts, the survey was constructed with an Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) form. Data of 133 university instructors were collected online. Results showed that support for designing learner-learner interaction was the priority for improving online learning. In terms of learner-instructor interaction, instructors needed to provide social-emotional support to learners so that learners could have a sense of belonging. For learner-instructor interaction, supporting instructors to monitor the level of understanding was the most highly demanding strategy for online learning. Limitations and suggestions for further studies were discussed.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A5A2A03046493).

참고문헌

  1. Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129-144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  2. Chei, M. J., & Lee, J. Y. (2017). Analysis of structural relationship among instructional quality, academic emotions, perceived achievement and learning satisfaction in offline and online university lectures. The Journal of Educational Information and Media, 23(3), 523-548.
  3. Cho, D. (2009). Exploring how to set priority in need analysis with survey. The Journal of Research in Education, 35, 165-187.
  4. Cho, Y. R., & Lee, Y. T. (2020, April, 10). The founder of an untact company is a billionaire; COVID-19 shakes the world economic order. DongA News. Retrieved from http://www.donga.com/news/article/all/20200410/100603595/1.
  5. Choi, E. J., & Choi, M. S. (2016). A meta-analysis on the impact of different e-learning interactions on learning effect. Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 139-164. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.32.1.139
  6. Dennen, V. P., Aubteen Darabi, A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor-learner interaction in online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on performance and satisfaction. Distance Education, 28(1), 65-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910701305319
  7. Diana, N., Eagle, M., Stamper, J., Grover, S., Bienkowski, M., & Basu, S. (2017). An instructor dashboard for real-time analytics in interactive programming assignments. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, 272-279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027441
  8. Do, J. (2020). An investigation of design constraints in the process of converting face-to-face course into online course. Journal of Education & Culture, 26(2), 153-173. https://doi.org/10.24159/JOEC.2020.26.2.153
  9. Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2014). Promoting active learning & leveraging dashboards for curriculum assessment in an OpenEdX introductory CS course for middle school. Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale Conference, 205-206. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2567883
  10. Han, S. Y. (2008). Collaboration in a web-based learning environment: Opportunities and challenges. Educational Technology International, 9(2), 123-142.
  11. Harasim, L. (1987). Teaching and learning on-line: Issues in computer-mediated graduate courses. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 16(2), 117-135.
  12. Jeon, Y. M., & Cho, J. S. (2017). Analysis of class satisfaction and perceived learning achievement to the interaction type on e-Learning in university. Journal of Internet Computing and Services, 18(1), 131-141. https://doi.org/10.7472/JKSII.2017.18.1.131
  13. Jeong, J. Y. (2020). Direction and examples of AI convergence education. Paper presented in the First AI Convergence Education Forum.
  14. Joo, Y., Chung, A., Yoo, N., & Yi, S. (2012). Investigating the structural relationships among perceived isolation, organizational support, satisfaction and consistency in cyber university. Journal of The Institute of Electronics Engineers of Korea, 49(10), 240-250.
  15. Jung, J. S., & Lim, K. Y. (2000). Effect analysis of factors related to the learner participation, achievement, and satisfaction in the Web-based online discussion. Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2), 107-135.
  16. Kang, M. S. (2009). Development of learners' perceived interaction model and scale between learner and instructor in e-Learning environments (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Korea University, Korea.
  17. Kim, E., & Byun, H. (2015). Developing guidelines for training program to increase faculty e-learning competencies. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 21(4), 573-599. https://doi.org/10.15833/KAFEIAM.21.4.573
  18. Kim, In., Ryu, S., Byun, H., & Seo, Y. (2020). Analysis of interaction experience through instructional digital imagination in non-face-to-face synchronous classes. Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 873-904. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.36.3.873
  19. Kim, M. E., Kim, M. J., Oh, Y., & Jung, S. Y. (2020). The effect of online substitution class caused by coronavirus(COVID-19) on the learning motivation, instructor-learner interaction, and class satisfaction of nursing students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 20(17), 519-541.
  20. Kim, S.-H., & Cheon, S.-M. (2020). A case study of online class operation and instructor's difficulties in physical education as a liberal arts in university due to COVID-19. Journal of Sport and Leisure Studies, 81, 9-26. https://doi.org/10.51979/KSSLS.2020.07.81.9
  21. Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
  22. Kwon, S. (2011). The investigation of the relationships among social presence, learners characteristics, perceived effects of discussion, perceived learning and satisfaction in online learning. The Journal of Educational Studies, 42(3), 55-82.
  23. Lee, E. (2021). Interactivity in distance education: a case study. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 21(12), 629-643. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2021.21.12.629
  24. Lee, J. E. (2010). Psychological distance between students and professors in asynchronous online learning, and its relationship to student achievement & preference for online courses. Educational Technology International, 11(2), 123-148.
  25. Lee, J. M. (2020). An exploratory study on effects of loneliness and YouTube addiction on college life adjustment in the distance education during COVID-19. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 20(7), 343-351.
  26. Lee, J. Y., Sung, B., Lee, J., Lim, K. Y., & Han, S. (2020). Challenges and tasks facing online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 671-692. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.36.3.671
  27. Lee, Y., Park, Y., & Yun, J. (2020). Exploring the "Types" through case analysis on operation of distance education in universities responding to COVID-19. The Journal of Yeolin Education, 28(3), 211-234.
  28. Leem, J., Kim, M., & Lee, S. (2021). Development of an online instructional design model for higher education in the era with COVID-19. The Journal of Educational Information and Media, 27(1), 281-311.
  29. Lim, C. (1999). A comprehensive design model for interactive web-based instruction. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.15.1.3
  30. Lim, C. (2016). Possibilities of an online learning community and challenges for its vitalization. Media and Education, 6(1), 13-19.
  31. Lim, C., Choi, S. Sl., Lim, J. H., & Jung, L. S. (2000). Effects of different types of interaction on learning and satisfaction in a Web-based lifelong learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 223-246. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.16.1.223
  32. Lim, C., Kim, M., Park, J., Bae, Y., & Yeom, J. (2021). Instructional Design Strategies for Synchronous Online Instruction in Various College Courses. Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 459-488. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.37.2.459
  33. Lim, C., Park, B., & Song, S. (2006). A comprehensive approach to support interactions in e-learning of mega universities. Journal of Lifelong Learning Society, 2(2), 1-22.
  34. Lim, J. Y. (2020). The effects of supporting monitoring for socially shared regulation on learning process and outcome in CSCL (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ewha Womans University, Korea.
  35. Lim, K. Y., Lim, J. Y., Park, M. J., Hato, A. E., Kim, Y. J., & Eur, J. (2020). Systematic review of CSCL research 2012-2018: Comparing South Korean and international research. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 31(1), 5-27.
  36. Lim, K.Y., Kim, H. J., & Park, H. N. (2014). The effects of learner participation and interaction in web-based collaborative learning. The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 17(4), 69-78. https://doi.org/10.32431/KACE.2014.17.4.007
  37. Lu, X., Liu, X. W., & Zhang, W. (2020). Diversities of learners' interactions in different MOOC courses: How these diversities affect communication in learning. Computers & Education, 151, 103873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103873
  38. Minerva project (n.d.). Maybe we need to rethink our assumptions about 'online' learning. https://www.minervaproject.com/solutions/forum-learning-environment/
  39. Mink, O. G., Shultz, J. M., & Mink, B. P. (1991). Developing and managing open organizations: A model and method for maximizing organizational potential. Somerset Consulting Group, Inc
  40. Moller, L. (1998). Designing communities of learners for asynchronous distance education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 115-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299678
  41. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
  42. Moore, M. G. (1993). Three types of interaction. In K. Harry, J. Mangus & D. Keegan (Eds.), Distance education: New perspectives (pp. 19-24). New York: Routledge.
  43. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Wadsworth, CA: Cengage Learning.
  44. Nandi, D., Hamilton, M., & Harland, J. (2012). Evaluating the quality of interaction in asynchronous discussion forums in fully online courses. Distance Education, 33(1), 5-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667957
  45. Northrup, P. (2001). A framework for designing interactivity into web-based instruction. Educational Technology, 41(2), 31-39.
  46. Oh, J. (2020). The future brought forward by COVID-19, from the era of teaching to the era of learning. Issue & Analysis, 2020(6), 1-25
  47. Park, D. H. (2020, April 2). Major universities 'super strong decision' due to COVID-19; Seoul National University and Ewha Womans University decided to offer online lectures for the first semester. UNN. Retrieved from https://news.unn.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=227747
  48. Park, Y. S. (2020, March 31). Task bomb & lack of feedback; College students appeal for improvement of online lectures. Yonhap News. Retrieved from https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20200331152600062
  49. Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guardia, L., & Koole, M. (2020). Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(3), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00085-4
  50. Saba, F., & Shearer, R. L. (1994). Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(1), 36-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526844
  51. Xhakaj, F., Aleven, V., & McLaren, B. M. (2017). Effects of a teacher dashboard for an intelligent tutoring system on teacher knowledge, lesson planning, lessons and student learning. In European conference on technology enhanced learning (pp. 315-329). Springer, Cham.
  52. Xiao, J. (2017). Learner-content interaction in distance education: The weakest link in interaction research. Distance Education. 38(1), 123-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1298982
  53. York, C. S., & Richardson, J. C. (2012). Interpersonal interaction in online learning: Experienced online instructors' perceptions of influencing factors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(4), 83-98.