Quarterly Review of Distance Education Journal Issue
Volume 16 #4
1st Edition
Published on 1. December 2015
117 pages
978-1-68123-491-5 (ISBN)
Description
The Quarterly Review of Distance Education is a rigorously refereed journal publishing articles, research briefs, reviews, and editorials dealing with the theories, research, and practices of distance education. The Quarterly Review publishes articles that utilize various methodologies that permit generalizable results which help guide the practice of the field of distance education in the public and private sectors. The Quarterly Review publishes fulllength manuscripts as well as research briefs, editorials, reviews of programs and scholarly works, and columns. The Quarterly Review defines distance education as institutionallybased formal education in which the learning group is separated and interactive technologies are used to unite the learning group.
More details
Other editions
Additional editions
Michael Simonson | Charles Schlosser
Quarterly Review of Distance Education Vol 16 Issue 4
Book
03/2016
Information Age Publishing
€47.00
Shipment within 3-4 weeks
Content
1 - Front Cover [Seite 1]
2 - Statement of Purpose [Seite 6]
2.1 - Quarterly Review of Distance Education [Seite 4]
2.2 - "Research That Guides Practice" [Seite 4]
2.2.1 - Volume 16 Number 4, 2015 [Seite 4]
2.2.1.1 - ARTICLES [Seite 4]
2.2.1.2 - Book Reviews [Seite 4]
2.3 - Quarterly Review of Distance Education Editors and Editorial Board [Seite 3]
2.3.1 - Editors [Seite 3]
2.3.2 - Assistant Editor [Seite 3]
2.3.3 - Editorial Assistant [Seite 3]
2.3.4 - Department Editors [Seite 3]
2.3.5 - International [Seite 3]
2.3.6 - Lya Visser, Learning Development Institute [Seite 3]
2.3.7 - Lucy Green, Georgia Southern University [Seite 3]
2.3.8 - Editorial Board [Seite 3]
3 - Online Module to Assure Success as Prelicensure Nursing Students Transition to Professional Practice [Seite 8]
3.1 - Diana-Lyn Baptiste and Sarah J. M. Shaefer [Seite 8]
3.1.1 - Johns Hopkins University [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1 - Prelicensure nursing students have a final capstone, practicum, or clinical course as they transition to the professional nurse role. Generally, the student role requires increased independent practice and this can be a challenge. To maximize learnin... [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1.1 - BACKGROUND [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1.2 - DESCRIPTION OF ONLINE MODULE [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.3 - 1. distinguish role of the nursing student, preceptor, and faculty mentor [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4 - 2. examine potential challenges in meeting learning objectives during clinical practicum [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4.1 - 3. explore tools for maximizing student learning from preceptors and faculty mentors. [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4.2 - INTERACTIVE STRATEGIES [Seite 10]
3.1.1.1.4.3 - CONCLUSION [Seite 10]
3.1.1.1.4.4 - REFERENCES [Seite 11]
3.1.1.1.4.4.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 11]
4 - Analysis of Student Perceptions of the Psychosocial Learning Environment in Online and Face-to-Face Career and Technical Education Courses [Seite 14]
4.1 - Diane L. Carver Michael F. Kosloski, Jr. [Seite 14]
4.1.1 - Bethel School District Old Dominion University [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1 - This study analyzed student perceptions of the psychosocial learning environment in online and face-to-face career and technical education courses, and used survey data from a school district in Washington state. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to mea... [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1.2 - Purpose Statement [Seite 15]
4.1.1.1.3 - Research Questions [Seite 15]
4.1.1.1.4 - Theoretical Framework [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.5 - Significance [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.6 - REVIEW OF LITERATURE [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.7 - Online and Distance Learning [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.8 - Career and Technical Education Online [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.9 - Psychosocial Learning Environment [Seite 17]
4.1.1.1.10 - Student Perceptions [Seite 18]
4.1.1.1.11 - METHODS AND PROCEDURES [Seite 18]
4.1.1.1.12 - Population and Sample [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.13 - Instrument Used [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.14 - Research Variables [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.15 - Data Analysis [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.16 - FINDINGS [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.17 - Response Rate [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.18 - Statistical Analyses: Research Questions 1 and 2 [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.18.1 - Scale Results: Face to Face [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.19 - Statistical Analyses: Research Question 3 [Seite 23]
4.1.1.1.20 - CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION [Seite 24]
4.1.1.1.21 - RECOMMENDATIONS [Seite 25]
4.1.1.1.22 - REFERENCES [Seite 26]
4.1.1.1.22.1 - Table 1 [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.23 - CTE Courses Offered in Washington School District During Current Semester [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.23.1 - Table 2 [Seite 21]
4.1.1.1.24 - Modified Items in Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES) [Seite 21]
4.1.1.1.24.1 - Table 3 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.25 - Internal Consistency Reliability (Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha) for Survey Scales [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.26 - 8 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.27 - 0.90 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.28 - 6 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.29 - 0.91 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.30 - 7 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.31 - 0.90 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.32 - 5 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.33 - 0.86 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.34 - 3 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.35 - 0.76 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.36 - 5 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.37 - 0.82 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.38 - 8 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.39 - 0.93 [Seite 22]
5 - Do E-learning Tools Make a Difference? [Seite 30]
5.1 - Results From a Case Study [Seite 30]
5.1.1 - David Desplaces, Carrie A. Blair, and Trent Salvaggio [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1 - College of Charleston [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1 - Even as academics continue to debate whether distance education techniques are successful, the market demands increased distance education programs and a growing number of corporations are using e-learning to train their employees. We propose and exa... [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1.2 - LEARNER THEORY and E-LEARNING [Seite 31]
5.1.1.1.1.3 - E-TOOLS AND THEIR IMPACT ON LEARNING [Seite 31]
5.1.1.1.1.4 - METHODS [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.5 - Participants [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.6 - Measures [Seite 34]
5.1.1.1.1.7 - RESULTS [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.8 - Descriptive Statistics [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.9 - Group Variance Evaluation [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.10 - Predicting Moderated Model Evaluation [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.11 - DISCUSSION [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.12 - PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.13 - LIMITATIONS [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.14 - FURTHER RESEARCH [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.15 - SUMMARY [Seite 39]
5.1.1.1.1.16 - REFERENCES [Seite 39]
5.1.1.1.1.16.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.16.2 - Table 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.17 - Means, Standard Deviations, Coefficients ? and Intercorrelations [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.18 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.19 - 83 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.20 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.21 - 0.827 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.22 - 41 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.23 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.24 - 0.848 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.25 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.26 - .166 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.27 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.28 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.29 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.30 - .256 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.31 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.32 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.33 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.34 - .050 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.35 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.36 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.37 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.38 - .064 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.39 - .142 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.40 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.41 - 0.615 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.42 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.43 - .157 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.44 - .006 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.45 - .312** [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.46 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.46.1 - Table 2 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.47 - Analysis of Variance [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.48 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.49 - .216 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.50 - .604 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.51 - .439 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.52 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.53 - .357 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.54 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.55 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.56 - .224 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.57 - .638 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.58 - .427 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.59 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.60 - .351 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.61 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.62 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.63 - .074 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.64 - .200 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.65 - .656 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.66 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.67 - .370 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.68 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.69 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.70 - .815 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.71 - 2.346 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.72 - .129 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.73 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.74 - .347 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.75 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.76 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.77 - 3.898 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.78 - .205 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.79 - .652 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.80 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.81 - 19.060 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.82 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.82.1 - Table 3 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.83 - Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations for Moderating Effect [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.84 - 14.79 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.85 - 83 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.86 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.87 - 68.95 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.88 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.89 - .277 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.90 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.91 - 71.96 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.92 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.93 - .244 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.94 - .810** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.95 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.96 - 75.11 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.97 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.98 - .346* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.99 - .785** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.100 - .739** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.101 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.102 - 67.23 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.103 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.104 - .320* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.105 - .691** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.106 - .693** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.107 - .625** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.108 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.109 - 506.83 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.110 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.111 - .367* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.112 - .624** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.113 - .614** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.114 - .586** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.115 - .635** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.116 - - [Seite 37]
6 - Assessing Faculty Experiences With and Perceptions of an Internal Quality Assurance Process for Undergraduate Distributed Learning Courses [Seite 42]
6.1 - A Pilot Study [Seite 42]
6.1.1 - Ryan Rucker Karen Edwards and Lydia R. Frass [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1 - Midlands Technical College University of South Carolina [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1 - To ensure that online courses match traditional classes' quality, some institutions are implementing internal standards for online course design and quality review. The University of South Carolina created the Distributed Learning Quality Review pr... [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.2 - Online Course Quality [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.3 - Quality Review at USC [Seite 43]
6.1.1.1.1.4 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 44]
6.1.1.1.1.5 - Instructional Designers [Seite 44]
6.1.1.1.1.6 - Learning Management Systems [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.7 - Quality Course Design [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.8 - Motivation for Adopting Change [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.9 - THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK [Seite 46]
6.1.1.1.1.10 - METHODOLOGY [Seite 46]
6.1.1.1.1.11 - Sample [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.12 - RESULTS [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.13 - Discussion [Seite 49]
6.1.1.1.1.14 - REFERENCES [Seite 50]
6.1.1.1.1.14.1 - Table 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.15 - Demographic Information of Sample [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.16 - 0-1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.17 - 2-4 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.18 - 5-8 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.19 - 9-12 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.20 - 0-1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.21 - 1-3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.22 - 4-5 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.23 - 5+ [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.24 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.25 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.26 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.27 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.28 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.29 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.30 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.31 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.32 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.33 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.34 - 4 [Seite 47]
7 - Intersubjectivity in Theoretical and Practical Online Courses [Seite 52]
7.1 - Janine Lim Barbara M. Hall [Seite 52]
7.1.1 - Andrews University Ashford University [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1 - Rigorous interaction between peers has been an elusive goal in online asynchronous discussions. Intersubjectivity, the goal of peer-to-peer interaction, is a representation of a higher quality of synthesis. It is the representation of knowledge const... [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1.2 - INTERSUBJECTIVITY IN SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST ONLINE DISCUSSIONS [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.3 - Social Constructivism in Online Discussion [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.4 - Interventions to Improve Quality of Online Discussions [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.5 - Intersubjectivity in Online Discussions [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.6 - Theoretical Versus Practical Course Content [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.7 - PURPOSE OF THE STUDY [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.8 - METHODS [Seite 56]
7.1.1.1.9 - Research Context [Seite 56]
7.1.1.1.10 - Participants [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.11 - Research Design [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.12 - Measures [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.13 - Procedures [Seite 58]
7.1.1.1.14 - RESULTS [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.15 - Peer Responses Descriptive Statistics [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.16 - Intersubjectivity of Peer Responses [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.17 - DISCUSSION [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.18 - CONCLUSION [Seite 62]
7.1.1.1.19 - REFERENCES [Seite 63]
7.1.1.1.19.1 - Table 1 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.20 - Peer Response Descriptives for Each Course [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.21 - 352 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.22 - 506 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.23 - 351 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.24 - 352 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.25 - 506 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.26 - 351 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.27 - 2 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.28 - 4 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.29 - 3 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.30 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.31 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.32 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.33 - 572 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.34 - 533 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.35 - 982 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.36 - 1 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.37 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.38 - 5 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.39 - 70.97 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.40 - 91.62 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.41 - 204.84 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.42 - .01 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.43 - .00 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.44 - .71 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.45 - 71.738 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.46 - 63.122 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.47 - 156.520 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.48 - .092 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.49 - .000 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.50 - .879 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.50.1 - Table 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.51 - Interaction Analysis Model Phases [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.52 - 98% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.53 - 100% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.54 - 70.4% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.55 - 2% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.56 - 18.2% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.57 - 9.1% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.58 - 0.6% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.59 - 1.7% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.59.1 - Table 3 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.60 - Discussion Expectations Effect on Peer Responses [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.61 - 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.62 - 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.63 - combined with peer [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.64 - 3 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.65 - 8 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.66 - 3-4 total posts [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.67 - No [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.68 - Yes [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.69 - Yes [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.70 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.71 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.72 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.73 - 1.02 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.74 - 1.00 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.75 - 1.45 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.76 - 70.97 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.77 - 91.62 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.78 - 204.84 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.78.1 - Table 4 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.79 - Intersubjectivity of Peer Responses [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.80 - 858 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.81 - 351 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.82 - 554.27 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.83 - 729.01 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.84 - 194106.5 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.85 - 15.776 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.86 - .001 [Seite 61]
8 - Triangulating Assessment of Online Collaborative Learning [Seite 68]
8.1 - Jennifer Lock and Carol Johnson [Seite 68]
8.1.1 - University of Calgary [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1 - Collaboration plays an integral role in the construction of knowledge in online learning environments. A supportive foundation for learning can be created through the intentional design of formative and summative assessments that embrace self-, peer-... [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1.2 - COLLABORATION [Seite 69]
8.1.1.1.3 - 1. Participation: Requires approximately equal participation among the members. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4 - 2. Interaction: Requires members to actively respond to each other as part of the discussion dynamic. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.1 - 3. Synthesis: The product developed by the members is representative of the synthesis of ideas and a result of input from all members. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.2 - ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.3 - COCONSTRUCTING KNOWLEDGE THROUGH COLLABORATION [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.4 - ASSESSING ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING [Seite 71]
8.1.1.1.4.5 - Assessment of Competence [Seite 71]
8.1.1.1.4.6 - Assessment Through Self, Peer, and Instructor Feedback [Seite 72]
8.1.1.1.4.7 - Role of Technology in Assessment [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.8 - ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ASSESSMENT MODEL [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.9 - Assessment Design [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.10 - Assessment Transaction [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.11 - Assessment of Knowledge Construction [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.12 - CONCLUSION [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.13 - REFERENCES [Seite 76]
8.1.1.1.4.13.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 74]
9 - Student Evaluation Response Rates of Teacher Performance in Higher Education Online Classes [Seite 78]
9.1 - Kelli R. Paquette, Frank Corbett, Jr., and Melissa Casses [Seite 78]
9.1.1 - Indiana University of Pennsylvania [Seite 78]
9.1.1.1 - The number of students taking at least 1 online course has surpassed 7.1 million and represents 33% (21.3 million) of all higher education students (Allen & Seaman, 2013). With the growing number of online courses, credibility may be questioned. Are ... [Seite 78]
9.1.1.1.1 - PURPOSE [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.2 - HYPOTHESES [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.3 - Research Questions [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4 - 1. In what communication processes in the presentation and delivery of online student evaluations do faculty engage to encourage the completion of these evaluations? [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.1 - 2. How do students perceive and respond to communication regarding the completion and importance of online evaluations? [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.2 - SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.3 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.4 - THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.5 - METHOD [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.6 - Participants [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.7 - Materials [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.8 - Procedures [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.9 - ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.10 - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH [Seite 83]
9.1.1.1.4.11 - LIMITATIONS [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.12 - CONCLUSION [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.13 - REFERENCES [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.14 - Appendix A-Qualtrics Survey for Faculty [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5 - 1. When was the end of the semester course evaluation first announced to students (choose all that apply)? [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.1 - (a) A week before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.2 - (b) 2 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.3 - (c) 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.4 - (d) More than 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6 - 2. How was the end of semester course evaluation first announced to the students (choose all that apply)? [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.1 - (a) E-mail announcement [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.2 - (b) Posted to class website [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.3 - (c) Posted to class assignments [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.4 - (d) Posted to a class discussion board [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.5 - (e) Other (Please specify) [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.7 - 3. Did you discuss the value of end of semester course evaluations with your students? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.7.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.7.2 - (b) No [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8 - 4. Did you use any reminder strategies to encourage students to respond to the evaluation (choose all that apply)? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.1 - (a) E-mail reminder [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.2 - (b) Posted reminder to class website [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.3 - (c) Posted to class discussion board [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.4 - (d) No reminder strategy used [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9 - 5. Did you offer students credit (participation points, extra points, etc.) for completing the evaluation? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9.2 - (b) No [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.10 - 6. Did you require students to complete the evaluation (e.g. in order to access the last assignment)? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.11 - 7. Please comment on any additional strategies used for encouraging student responses to online course evaluations and please add any other insights into this issue. [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.11.1 - APPENDIX B-Qualtrics Survey for Students [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12 - 1. When was the end of the semester course evaluation first announced to you (choose all that apply)? [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.1 - (a) A week before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.2 - (b) 2 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.3 - (c) 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.4 - (d) More than 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13 - 2. How was the end of semester course evaluation first announced to you (choose all that apply)? [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.1 - (a) E-mail announcement [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.2 - (b) Posted to class website [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.3 - (c) Posted to class assignments [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.4 - (d) Posted to a class discussion board [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.5 - (e) Other (Please specify) [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.14 - 3. Did the instructor discuss the value of end-of-semester course evaluations with you? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.14.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.14.2 - (b) No [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15 - 4. Did the instructor use any reminder strategies to encourage you to respond to the evaluation (choose all that apply)? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.1 - (a) E-mail reminder [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.2 - (b) Posted reminder to class website [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.3 - (c) Posted to class discussion board [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.4 - (d) No reminder strategy used [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16 - 5. Did the instructor offer you credit (participation points, extra points, etc.) for completing the evaluation? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16.2 - (b) No [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.17 - 6. Did the instructor require you to complete the evaluation (e.g. in order to access the last assignment)? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.18 - 7. Please comment on any additional strategies used by the instructor to encourage you to respond to online course evaluations and please add any other insights into this issue (What would it take for you to complete the online student evaluation, if... [Seite 89]
10 - Using ADDIE and Systems Thinking as the Framework for Developing a MOOC [Seite 90]
10.1 - A Case Study [Seite 90]
10.1.1 - Rebecca A. Croxton and Anthony S. Chow [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1 - The University of North Carolina at Greensboro [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1.1 - This article presents a case study of how systems thinking and the instructional systems design ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, and assessment) model were used to design and develop one of the first MOOCs at a mid-sized universi... [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1.1.1 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 91]
10.1.1.1.1.2 - Brief History of MOOCs [Seite 91]
10.1.1.1.1.3 - Contemporary Issues Surrounding MOOCs [Seite 92]
10.1.1.1.1.4 - Need for a User-Centered Design Approach [Seite 92]
10.1.1.1.1.5 - METHOD [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.6 - RESULTS [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.7 - Research Question 1: What Is the Process for Designing and Developing a MOOC? [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.8 - Analysis Phase [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.9 - Design Phase [Seite 95]
10.1.1.1.1.10 - Development Phase [Seite 95]
10.1.1.1.1.11 - Implementation Phase [Seite 97]
10.1.1.1.1.12 - Evaluation Phase [Seite 99]
10.1.1.1.1.13 - Research Question 2: What Impact Did Using the ADDIE Model Have on MOOC Design? [Seite 99]
10.1.1.1.1.14 - Research Question 3: What Is the Relationship Between Instructional Design and MOOCs? [Seite 100]
10.1.1.1.1.15 - IMPLICATIONS [Seite 101]
10.1.1.1.1.16 - REFERENCES [Seite 102]
10.1.1.1.1.16.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 93]
10.1.1.1.1.16.2 - Table 2 [Seite 96]
10.1.1.1.1.17 - Outcomes Map Refined Using Google Drive by the Design Team [Seite 96]
10.1.1.1.1.17.1 - Figure 3 [Seite 98]
10.1.1.1.1.17.2 - Figure 4 [Seite 98]
10.1.1.1.1.17.3 - Figure 5 [Seite 100]
10.1.2 - Book Review [Seite 104]
10.1.2.1 - Lucy Green, Book Review Editor [Seite 104]
10.2 - Conquering the Content: A Blueprint for Online Course Design and Development (2nd ed.), by Robin M. Smith [Seite 104]
10.2.1 - Michelle Rogers-Estable [Seite 104]
10.2.1.1 - SUNY Delhi [Seite 104]
10.2.2 - Book Review [Seite 106]
10.2.2.1 - Lucy Green, Book Review Editor [Seite 106]
10.3 - Teaching in a Digital Age, by A. W. (Tony) Bates [Seite 106]
10.3.1 - Tonia A. Dousay [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1 - University of Wyoming [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1.1 - SUMMARY [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1.2 - DISCLAIMERS AND ASSUMPTIONS [Seite 108]
11 - Conference Calendar [Seite 110]
11.1 - Charles Schlosser [Seite 110]
11.1.1 - Nova Southeastern University [Seite 110]
11.1.1.1 - United States Distance Learning Association Annual Conference, May 10-12, St. Louis, MO [Seite 110]
11.1.1.2 - EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology, June 27-30, Vancouver, BC, Canada [Seite 110]
11.1.1.3 - ISTE, June 26-29, Denver, CO [Seite 110]
11.1.1.4 - Distance Teaching and Learning Conference, August 9-11, Madison, WI [Seite 111]
11.1.1.5 - AECT International Convention, October 17-21, Las Vegas, NV [Seite 111]
11.1.1.6 - E-Learn 2016: World Conference on E-Learning, November 14-16, Washington, DC [Seite 111]
11.1.1.7 - OLC Accelerate, November 16-18, Orlando, FL [Seite 111]
12 - AUTHOR BIOGRAPHICAL DATA [Seite 112]
13 - Back Cover [Seite 116]
2 - Statement of Purpose [Seite 6]
2.1 - Quarterly Review of Distance Education [Seite 4]
2.2 - "Research That Guides Practice" [Seite 4]
2.2.1 - Volume 16 Number 4, 2015 [Seite 4]
2.2.1.1 - ARTICLES [Seite 4]
2.2.1.2 - Book Reviews [Seite 4]
2.3 - Quarterly Review of Distance Education Editors and Editorial Board [Seite 3]
2.3.1 - Editors [Seite 3]
2.3.2 - Assistant Editor [Seite 3]
2.3.3 - Editorial Assistant [Seite 3]
2.3.4 - Department Editors [Seite 3]
2.3.5 - International [Seite 3]
2.3.6 - Lya Visser, Learning Development Institute [Seite 3]
2.3.7 - Lucy Green, Georgia Southern University [Seite 3]
2.3.8 - Editorial Board [Seite 3]
3 - Online Module to Assure Success as Prelicensure Nursing Students Transition to Professional Practice [Seite 8]
3.1 - Diana-Lyn Baptiste and Sarah J. M. Shaefer [Seite 8]
3.1.1 - Johns Hopkins University [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1 - Prelicensure nursing students have a final capstone, practicum, or clinical course as they transition to the professional nurse role. Generally, the student role requires increased independent practice and this can be a challenge. To maximize learnin... [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1.1 - BACKGROUND [Seite 8]
3.1.1.1.2 - DESCRIPTION OF ONLINE MODULE [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.3 - 1. distinguish role of the nursing student, preceptor, and faculty mentor [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4 - 2. examine potential challenges in meeting learning objectives during clinical practicum [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4.1 - 3. explore tools for maximizing student learning from preceptors and faculty mentors. [Seite 9]
3.1.1.1.4.2 - INTERACTIVE STRATEGIES [Seite 10]
3.1.1.1.4.3 - CONCLUSION [Seite 10]
3.1.1.1.4.4 - REFERENCES [Seite 11]
3.1.1.1.4.4.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 11]
4 - Analysis of Student Perceptions of the Psychosocial Learning Environment in Online and Face-to-Face Career and Technical Education Courses [Seite 14]
4.1 - Diane L. Carver Michael F. Kosloski, Jr. [Seite 14]
4.1.1 - Bethel School District Old Dominion University [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1 - This study analyzed student perceptions of the psychosocial learning environment in online and face-to-face career and technical education courses, and used survey data from a school district in Washington state. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to mea... [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 14]
4.1.1.1.2 - Purpose Statement [Seite 15]
4.1.1.1.3 - Research Questions [Seite 15]
4.1.1.1.4 - Theoretical Framework [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.5 - Significance [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.6 - REVIEW OF LITERATURE [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.7 - Online and Distance Learning [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.8 - Career and Technical Education Online [Seite 16]
4.1.1.1.9 - Psychosocial Learning Environment [Seite 17]
4.1.1.1.10 - Student Perceptions [Seite 18]
4.1.1.1.11 - METHODS AND PROCEDURES [Seite 18]
4.1.1.1.12 - Population and Sample [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.13 - Instrument Used [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.14 - Research Variables [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.15 - Data Analysis [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.16 - FINDINGS [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.17 - Response Rate [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.18 - Statistical Analyses: Research Questions 1 and 2 [Seite 20]
4.1.1.1.18.1 - Scale Results: Face to Face [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.19 - Statistical Analyses: Research Question 3 [Seite 23]
4.1.1.1.20 - CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION [Seite 24]
4.1.1.1.21 - RECOMMENDATIONS [Seite 25]
4.1.1.1.22 - REFERENCES [Seite 26]
4.1.1.1.22.1 - Table 1 [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.23 - CTE Courses Offered in Washington School District During Current Semester [Seite 19]
4.1.1.1.23.1 - Table 2 [Seite 21]
4.1.1.1.24 - Modified Items in Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES) [Seite 21]
4.1.1.1.24.1 - Table 3 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.25 - Internal Consistency Reliability (Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha) for Survey Scales [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.26 - 8 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.27 - 0.90 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.28 - 6 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.29 - 0.91 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.30 - 7 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.31 - 0.90 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.32 - 5 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.33 - 0.86 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.34 - 3 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.35 - 0.76 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.36 - 5 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.37 - 0.82 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.38 - 8 [Seite 22]
4.1.1.1.39 - 0.93 [Seite 22]
5 - Do E-learning Tools Make a Difference? [Seite 30]
5.1 - Results From a Case Study [Seite 30]
5.1.1 - David Desplaces, Carrie A. Blair, and Trent Salvaggio [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1 - College of Charleston [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1 - Even as academics continue to debate whether distance education techniques are successful, the market demands increased distance education programs and a growing number of corporations are using e-learning to train their employees. We propose and exa... [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 30]
5.1.1.1.1.2 - LEARNER THEORY and E-LEARNING [Seite 31]
5.1.1.1.1.3 - E-TOOLS AND THEIR IMPACT ON LEARNING [Seite 31]
5.1.1.1.1.4 - METHODS [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.5 - Participants [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.6 - Measures [Seite 34]
5.1.1.1.1.7 - RESULTS [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.8 - Descriptive Statistics [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.9 - Group Variance Evaluation [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.10 - Predicting Moderated Model Evaluation [Seite 35]
5.1.1.1.1.11 - DISCUSSION [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.12 - PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.13 - LIMITATIONS [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.14 - FURTHER RESEARCH [Seite 38]
5.1.1.1.1.15 - SUMMARY [Seite 39]
5.1.1.1.1.16 - REFERENCES [Seite 39]
5.1.1.1.1.16.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 33]
5.1.1.1.1.16.2 - Table 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.17 - Means, Standard Deviations, Coefficients ? and Intercorrelations [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.18 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.19 - 83 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.20 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.21 - 0.827 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.22 - 41 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.23 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.24 - 0.848 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.25 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.26 - .166 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.27 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.28 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.29 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.30 - .256 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.31 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.32 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.33 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.34 - .050 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.35 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.36 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.37 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.38 - .064 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.39 - .142 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.40 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.41 - 0.615 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.42 - 90 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.43 - .157 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.44 - .006 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.45 - .312** [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.46 - - [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.46.1 - Table 2 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.47 - Analysis of Variance [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.48 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.49 - .216 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.50 - .604 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.51 - .439 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.52 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.53 - .357 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.54 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.55 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.56 - .224 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.57 - .638 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.58 - .427 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.59 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.60 - .351 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.61 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.62 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.63 - .074 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.64 - .200 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.65 - .656 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.66 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.67 - .370 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.68 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.69 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.70 - .815 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.71 - 2.346 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.72 - .129 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.73 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.74 - .347 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.75 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.76 - 1 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.77 - 3.898 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.78 - .205 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.79 - .652 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.80 - 88 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.81 - 19.060 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.82 - 89 [Seite 36]
5.1.1.1.1.82.1 - Table 3 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.83 - Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations for Moderating Effect [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.84 - 14.79 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.85 - 83 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.86 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.87 - 68.95 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.88 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.89 - .277 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.90 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.91 - 71.96 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.92 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.93 - .244 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.94 - .810** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.95 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.96 - 75.11 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.97 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.98 - .346* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.99 - .785** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.100 - .739** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.101 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.102 - 67.23 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.103 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.104 - .320* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.105 - .691** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.106 - .693** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.107 - .625** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.108 - - [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.109 - 506.83 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.110 - 41 [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.111 - .367* [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.112 - .624** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.113 - .614** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.114 - .586** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.115 - .635** [Seite 37]
5.1.1.1.1.116 - - [Seite 37]
6 - Assessing Faculty Experiences With and Perceptions of an Internal Quality Assurance Process for Undergraduate Distributed Learning Courses [Seite 42]
6.1 - A Pilot Study [Seite 42]
6.1.1 - Ryan Rucker Karen Edwards and Lydia R. Frass [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1 - Midlands Technical College University of South Carolina [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1 - To ensure that online courses match traditional classes' quality, some institutions are implementing internal standards for online course design and quality review. The University of South Carolina created the Distributed Learning Quality Review pr... [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.2 - Online Course Quality [Seite 42]
6.1.1.1.1.3 - Quality Review at USC [Seite 43]
6.1.1.1.1.4 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 44]
6.1.1.1.1.5 - Instructional Designers [Seite 44]
6.1.1.1.1.6 - Learning Management Systems [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.7 - Quality Course Design [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.8 - Motivation for Adopting Change [Seite 45]
6.1.1.1.1.9 - THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK [Seite 46]
6.1.1.1.1.10 - METHODOLOGY [Seite 46]
6.1.1.1.1.11 - Sample [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.12 - RESULTS [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.13 - Discussion [Seite 49]
6.1.1.1.1.14 - REFERENCES [Seite 50]
6.1.1.1.1.14.1 - Table 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.15 - Demographic Information of Sample [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.16 - 0-1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.17 - 2-4 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.18 - 5-8 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.19 - 9-12 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.20 - 0-1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.21 - 1-3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.22 - 4-5 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.23 - 5+ [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.24 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.25 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.26 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.27 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.28 - 1 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.29 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.30 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.31 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.32 - 3 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.33 - 2 [Seite 47]
6.1.1.1.1.34 - 4 [Seite 47]
7 - Intersubjectivity in Theoretical and Practical Online Courses [Seite 52]
7.1 - Janine Lim Barbara M. Hall [Seite 52]
7.1.1 - Andrews University Ashford University [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1 - Rigorous interaction between peers has been an elusive goal in online asynchronous discussions. Intersubjectivity, the goal of peer-to-peer interaction, is a representation of a higher quality of synthesis. It is the representation of knowledge const... [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 52]
7.1.1.1.2 - INTERSUBJECTIVITY IN SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST ONLINE DISCUSSIONS [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.3 - Social Constructivism in Online Discussion [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.4 - Interventions to Improve Quality of Online Discussions [Seite 53]
7.1.1.1.5 - Intersubjectivity in Online Discussions [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.6 - Theoretical Versus Practical Course Content [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.7 - PURPOSE OF THE STUDY [Seite 55]
7.1.1.1.8 - METHODS [Seite 56]
7.1.1.1.9 - Research Context [Seite 56]
7.1.1.1.10 - Participants [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.11 - Research Design [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.12 - Measures [Seite 57]
7.1.1.1.13 - Procedures [Seite 58]
7.1.1.1.14 - RESULTS [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.15 - Peer Responses Descriptive Statistics [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.16 - Intersubjectivity of Peer Responses [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.17 - DISCUSSION [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.18 - CONCLUSION [Seite 62]
7.1.1.1.19 - REFERENCES [Seite 63]
7.1.1.1.19.1 - Table 1 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.20 - Peer Response Descriptives for Each Course [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.21 - 352 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.22 - 506 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.23 - 351 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.24 - 352 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.25 - 506 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.26 - 351 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.27 - 2 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.28 - 4 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.29 - 3 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.30 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.31 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.32 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.33 - 572 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.34 - 533 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.35 - 982 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.36 - 1 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.37 - 0 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.38 - 5 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.39 - 70.97 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.40 - 91.62 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.41 - 204.84 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.42 - .01 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.43 - .00 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.44 - .71 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.45 - 71.738 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.46 - 63.122 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.47 - 156.520 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.48 - .092 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.49 - .000 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.50 - .879 [Seite 59]
7.1.1.1.50.1 - Table 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.51 - Interaction Analysis Model Phases [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.52 - 98% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.53 - 100% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.54 - 70.4% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.55 - 2% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.56 - 18.2% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.57 - 9.1% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.58 - 0.6% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.59 - 1.7% [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.59.1 - Table 3 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.60 - Discussion Expectations Effect on Peer Responses [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.61 - 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.62 - 2 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.63 - combined with peer [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.64 - 3 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.65 - 8 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.66 - 3-4 total posts [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.67 - No [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.68 - Yes [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.69 - Yes [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.70 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.71 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.72 - None [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.73 - 1.02 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.74 - 1.00 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.75 - 1.45 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.76 - 70.97 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.77 - 91.62 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.78 - 204.84 [Seite 60]
7.1.1.1.78.1 - Table 4 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.79 - Intersubjectivity of Peer Responses [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.80 - 858 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.81 - 351 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.82 - 554.27 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.83 - 729.01 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.84 - 194106.5 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.85 - 15.776 [Seite 61]
7.1.1.1.86 - .001 [Seite 61]
8 - Triangulating Assessment of Online Collaborative Learning [Seite 68]
8.1 - Jennifer Lock and Carol Johnson [Seite 68]
8.1.1 - University of Calgary [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1 - Collaboration plays an integral role in the construction of knowledge in online learning environments. A supportive foundation for learning can be created through the intentional design of formative and summative assessments that embrace self-, peer-... [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1.1 - INTRODUCTION [Seite 68]
8.1.1.1.2 - COLLABORATION [Seite 69]
8.1.1.1.3 - 1. Participation: Requires approximately equal participation among the members. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4 - 2. Interaction: Requires members to actively respond to each other as part of the discussion dynamic. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.1 - 3. Synthesis: The product developed by the members is representative of the synthesis of ideas and a result of input from all members. [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.2 - ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.3 - COCONSTRUCTING KNOWLEDGE THROUGH COLLABORATION [Seite 70]
8.1.1.1.4.4 - ASSESSING ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING [Seite 71]
8.1.1.1.4.5 - Assessment of Competence [Seite 71]
8.1.1.1.4.6 - Assessment Through Self, Peer, and Instructor Feedback [Seite 72]
8.1.1.1.4.7 - Role of Technology in Assessment [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.8 - ONLINE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ASSESSMENT MODEL [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.9 - Assessment Design [Seite 73]
8.1.1.1.4.10 - Assessment Transaction [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.11 - Assessment of Knowledge Construction [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.12 - CONCLUSION [Seite 75]
8.1.1.1.4.13 - REFERENCES [Seite 76]
8.1.1.1.4.13.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 74]
9 - Student Evaluation Response Rates of Teacher Performance in Higher Education Online Classes [Seite 78]
9.1 - Kelli R. Paquette, Frank Corbett, Jr., and Melissa Casses [Seite 78]
9.1.1 - Indiana University of Pennsylvania [Seite 78]
9.1.1.1 - The number of students taking at least 1 online course has surpassed 7.1 million and represents 33% (21.3 million) of all higher education students (Allen & Seaman, 2013). With the growing number of online courses, credibility may be questioned. Are ... [Seite 78]
9.1.1.1.1 - PURPOSE [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.2 - HYPOTHESES [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.3 - Research Questions [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4 - 1. In what communication processes in the presentation and delivery of online student evaluations do faculty engage to encourage the completion of these evaluations? [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.1 - 2. How do students perceive and respond to communication regarding the completion and importance of online evaluations? [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.2 - SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.3 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 79]
9.1.1.1.4.4 - THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.5 - METHOD [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.6 - Participants [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.7 - Materials [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.8 - Procedures [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.9 - ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS [Seite 81]
9.1.1.1.4.10 - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH [Seite 83]
9.1.1.1.4.11 - LIMITATIONS [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.12 - CONCLUSION [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.13 - REFERENCES [Seite 84]
9.1.1.1.4.14 - Appendix A-Qualtrics Survey for Faculty [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5 - 1. When was the end of the semester course evaluation first announced to students (choose all that apply)? [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.1 - (a) A week before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.2 - (b) 2 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.3 - (c) 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.4 - (d) More than 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.5.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6 - 2. How was the end of semester course evaluation first announced to the students (choose all that apply)? [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.1 - (a) E-mail announcement [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.2 - (b) Posted to class website [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.3 - (c) Posted to class assignments [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.4 - (d) Posted to a class discussion board [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.6.5 - (e) Other (Please specify) [Seite 86]
9.1.1.1.7 - 3. Did you discuss the value of end of semester course evaluations with your students? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.7.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.7.2 - (b) No [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8 - 4. Did you use any reminder strategies to encourage students to respond to the evaluation (choose all that apply)? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.1 - (a) E-mail reminder [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.2 - (b) Posted reminder to class website [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.3 - (c) Posted to class discussion board [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.4 - (d) No reminder strategy used [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.8.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9 - 5. Did you offer students credit (participation points, extra points, etc.) for completing the evaluation? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.9.2 - (b) No [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.10 - 6. Did you require students to complete the evaluation (e.g. in order to access the last assignment)? [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.11 - 7. Please comment on any additional strategies used for encouraging student responses to online course evaluations and please add any other insights into this issue. [Seite 87]
9.1.1.1.11.1 - APPENDIX B-Qualtrics Survey for Students [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12 - 1. When was the end of the semester course evaluation first announced to you (choose all that apply)? [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.1 - (a) A week before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.2 - (b) 2 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.3 - (c) 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.4 - (d) More than 3 weeks before the last day of the semester [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.12.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13 - 2. How was the end of semester course evaluation first announced to you (choose all that apply)? [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.1 - (a) E-mail announcement [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.2 - (b) Posted to class website [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.3 - (c) Posted to class assignments [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.4 - (d) Posted to a class discussion board [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.13.5 - (e) Other (Please specify) [Seite 88]
9.1.1.1.14 - 3. Did the instructor discuss the value of end-of-semester course evaluations with you? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.14.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.14.2 - (b) No [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15 - 4. Did the instructor use any reminder strategies to encourage you to respond to the evaluation (choose all that apply)? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.1 - (a) E-mail reminder [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.2 - (b) Posted reminder to class website [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.3 - (c) Posted to class discussion board [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.4 - (d) No reminder strategy used [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.15.5 - (e) Other (please specify) [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16 - 5. Did the instructor offer you credit (participation points, extra points, etc.) for completing the evaluation? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16.1 - (a) Yes [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.16.2 - (b) No [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.17 - 6. Did the instructor require you to complete the evaluation (e.g. in order to access the last assignment)? [Seite 89]
9.1.1.1.18 - 7. Please comment on any additional strategies used by the instructor to encourage you to respond to online course evaluations and please add any other insights into this issue (What would it take for you to complete the online student evaluation, if... [Seite 89]
10 - Using ADDIE and Systems Thinking as the Framework for Developing a MOOC [Seite 90]
10.1 - A Case Study [Seite 90]
10.1.1 - Rebecca A. Croxton and Anthony S. Chow [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1 - The University of North Carolina at Greensboro [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1.1 - This article presents a case study of how systems thinking and the instructional systems design ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, and assessment) model were used to design and develop one of the first MOOCs at a mid-sized universi... [Seite 90]
10.1.1.1.1.1 - LITERATURE REVIEW [Seite 91]
10.1.1.1.1.2 - Brief History of MOOCs [Seite 91]
10.1.1.1.1.3 - Contemporary Issues Surrounding MOOCs [Seite 92]
10.1.1.1.1.4 - Need for a User-Centered Design Approach [Seite 92]
10.1.1.1.1.5 - METHOD [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.6 - RESULTS [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.7 - Research Question 1: What Is the Process for Designing and Developing a MOOC? [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.8 - Analysis Phase [Seite 94]
10.1.1.1.1.9 - Design Phase [Seite 95]
10.1.1.1.1.10 - Development Phase [Seite 95]
10.1.1.1.1.11 - Implementation Phase [Seite 97]
10.1.1.1.1.12 - Evaluation Phase [Seite 99]
10.1.1.1.1.13 - Research Question 2: What Impact Did Using the ADDIE Model Have on MOOC Design? [Seite 99]
10.1.1.1.1.14 - Research Question 3: What Is the Relationship Between Instructional Design and MOOCs? [Seite 100]
10.1.1.1.1.15 - IMPLICATIONS [Seite 101]
10.1.1.1.1.16 - REFERENCES [Seite 102]
10.1.1.1.1.16.1 - Figure 1 [Seite 93]
10.1.1.1.1.16.2 - Table 2 [Seite 96]
10.1.1.1.1.17 - Outcomes Map Refined Using Google Drive by the Design Team [Seite 96]
10.1.1.1.1.17.1 - Figure 3 [Seite 98]
10.1.1.1.1.17.2 - Figure 4 [Seite 98]
10.1.1.1.1.17.3 - Figure 5 [Seite 100]
10.1.2 - Book Review [Seite 104]
10.1.2.1 - Lucy Green, Book Review Editor [Seite 104]
10.2 - Conquering the Content: A Blueprint for Online Course Design and Development (2nd ed.), by Robin M. Smith [Seite 104]
10.2.1 - Michelle Rogers-Estable [Seite 104]
10.2.1.1 - SUNY Delhi [Seite 104]
10.2.2 - Book Review [Seite 106]
10.2.2.1 - Lucy Green, Book Review Editor [Seite 106]
10.3 - Teaching in a Digital Age, by A. W. (Tony) Bates [Seite 106]
10.3.1 - Tonia A. Dousay [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1 - University of Wyoming [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1.1 - SUMMARY [Seite 106]
10.3.1.1.2 - DISCLAIMERS AND ASSUMPTIONS [Seite 108]
11 - Conference Calendar [Seite 110]
11.1 - Charles Schlosser [Seite 110]
11.1.1 - Nova Southeastern University [Seite 110]
11.1.1.1 - United States Distance Learning Association Annual Conference, May 10-12, St. Louis, MO [Seite 110]
11.1.1.2 - EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology, June 27-30, Vancouver, BC, Canada [Seite 110]
11.1.1.3 - ISTE, June 26-29, Denver, CO [Seite 110]
11.1.1.4 - Distance Teaching and Learning Conference, August 9-11, Madison, WI [Seite 111]
11.1.1.5 - AECT International Convention, October 17-21, Las Vegas, NV [Seite 111]
11.1.1.6 - E-Learn 2016: World Conference on E-Learning, November 14-16, Washington, DC [Seite 111]
11.1.1.7 - OLC Accelerate, November 16-18, Orlando, FL [Seite 111]
12 - AUTHOR BIOGRAPHICAL DATA [Seite 112]
13 - Back Cover [Seite 116]
