You are here

Home » Content

PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT EFFECTIVE DESIGN OF BLENDED UNIVERSITY CHEMISTRY COURSES

Journal Name:

  • The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of the study is to examine how blended learning can be used more effectively for university chemistry courses, based on the perceptions of students. The sample included 179 pre-service science teachers in year one through year four who had taken a university chemistry class. Qualitative data were gathered through open-ended questions and semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis. The results revealed necessary design characteristics for an effective blended chemistry course from students’ point of view regarding content of online instruction, the teaching methods, interface design, use of media and other visual elements, usability, design techniques, and facilitator role. The results showed that instruction should be carefully planned and must be appropriate to student needs and characteristics, the content should not be too long or complicated, content should be prepared by experts in chemistry, include reliable and valid information, designed to promote the learning process by choosing appropriate visual elements and media, be consistent with the learning outcomes, and include evaluation questions. Blended instruction should include various updated and easily accessible technological resources and tools to facilitate learning. The results also revealed that blended learning environment is most suitable for specific topics such as organic chemistry, acids and bases, the structure of atom and matter. Finally, a blended learning component matrix was created and suggested to show the interactions between the categories based on the perceptions of the participants. The results of this study, therefore, suggest important implications for instructors when designing effective blended chemistry courses for pre-service science teachers.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon article_11.pdf
  • 3
165-180
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Burewicz, A., & Miranowicz, M. (2005). Individualisation of student’s tasks in BL course of information technology for chemists with dynamic instructions, Recent Research Developments in Learning Technologies m-ICTE2005 Retrieved April 12, 2009 from http://www.formatex.org/micte2005
Chew, E. (2008). Book review: Blended learning tools for teaching and training (Barbara Allan). Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 344-347.
Dalgarno, B., Bishop, A. G., Adlong, W., & Bedgood D. R. (in press). Effectiveness of a virtual laboratory as a preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students. Computers & Education.
Delfino, M., & Persico D. (2007). Online or face-to-face? Experimenting with different techniques in teacher training. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 351–365.
Delialioglu, O., & Yildirim, Z. (2007). Students’ perceptions on effective dimensions of interactive learning in a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 133-146.
179
Dick, W., Carey, L. & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2007). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons.
Gerber, M., Grund, S., & Grote, G. (2008). Distributed collaboration activities in a blended learning scenario and the effects on learning performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 232–244.
Graham, C. R. (2006). BL systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). Handbook of BL: Global Perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
Goktas, Y., Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of icts integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 193–204.
Guan, Y.-H. (2009). A Study on the learning efficiency of multimedia-presented, computer-based science information. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 62–72.
Kay, R. (2007). A formative analysis of how pre-service teachers learn to use technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 366–383.
Lambert, J., Gong, Y., & Cuper, P. (2008). Technology, transfer, and teaching: the impact of a single technology course on preservice teachers’ computer attitudes and ability. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(4), 385-410.
Mouzakis, C. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of a BL approach for ICT teacher training, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(4), 459-481
Ng, E.M.W. (2008). Engaging student teachers in peer learning via a blended learning environment. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5, 325-334.
Ozdilek, Z., Ozkan, M. (2009). The effect of applying elements of instructional design on teaching material for the subject of classification of matter. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), 8(1), 84-96.
Palmer, S. R., & Holt, D. M. (2009). Examining student satisfaction with wholly online learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 101–113.
Pereira, L., Pleguezuelos, E., Merý´, A., Molina-Ros, A., Molina-Toma´s M. C. ,& Masdeu, C. (2007). Effectiveness of using BL strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Medical Education, 41, 189–195
Lan, J. (2001). Web-based instruction for education faculty: A needs assessment. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 385-399.
Sancho, P., Corral, R., Rivas, T., Gonza´lez, M.J., Chordi, A., & Tejedor, C. (2006). Instructional design and assessment a BL experience for teaching microbiology. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70(5), 1-9.
180
Singh, H. (2003). Building effective BL programs. Issue of Educational Technology, 43(6), 51-54.
Stein, M., Stuen, C., Carnine, D.,& Long, R. M. (2001). Textbook evaluation and adoption practices. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 17, 5–23.
Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2008). Who is responsible for e-learning success in higher education? A stakeholders' analysis. Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 26-36.
Wang, T., H. (2006). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an
e-learning environment?. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 171–186.
Wang, Y-S., Wu, M-C., & Wang, H-Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92-118.
Yukselturk, E. & Bulut, S. (2007). Predictors for Student Success in an Online Course. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 71-83.
Zheng, L.& Smaldino, S. (2003). Key instructional design elements for distance education. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(2), 153-166.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com