ارزیابی کیفیت برنامه آموزش الکترونیکی دوره کارشناسی ارشد مهندسی فن‌آوری اطلاعات دانشگاه شیراز

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد آموزش بزرگسالان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه روش‌ها و برنامه‌های آموزشی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

گسترش فن‌آوری‌ های ارتباطی، با به ارمغان آوردن آموزش‌ های الکترونیکی برای حوزه ‌های دانشگاهی، بستر مناسبی جهت توسعه سریع آموزش‌ عالی را فراهم ساخت. اما هم‌زمان، کیفیت آموزشی این برنامه‌ها به یکی از دغدغه ‌های آموزشی عصر حاضر تبدیل شد. هدف از انجام پژوهش حاضر ارزیابی کیفیت برنامه‌های آموزشی دانشگاه مجازی شیراز، بر اساس ده ملاک محتوا، ارتباط و تعامل، انعطاف‌پذیری و سازگاری، توجیه دانشجویان، پشتیبانی فنی، پشتیبانی آموزشی، راهبردهای ارزیابی، بازخورد، راهبردهای تدریس و هدایت برخط می‌باشد. روش تحقیق از نوع توصیفی، پیمایشی بود. جامعه آماری پژوهش ‌را 92 نفر از دانشجویان کارشناسی‌ارشد فن‌آوری اطلاعات دانشگاه مجازی شیراز تشکیل می‌دادند. اطلاعات، با استفاده از پرسش‌نامه محقق‌ساخته در مقیاس پنج درجه‌ای لیکرت گردآوری شد. پایایی پرسش‌نامه با استفاده از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ برابر با 0/96 محاسبه گردید. دانشجویان میزان کیفیت ملاک‌های محتوا، انعطاف‌پذیری و سازگاری، پشتیبانی فنی، راهبردهای ارزیابی و هدایت برخط را نامطلوب و میزان کیفیت ملاک‌های ارتباط و تعامل، توجیه دانشجویان، پشتیبانی آموزشی، بازخورد و راهبردهای تدریس را در سطح متوسط ارزیابی نمودند. در کل، نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد کیفیت دوره‌های مجازی دانشگاه شیراز از دید دانشجویان در سطح مطلوبی ارزیابی نمی‌گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the Quality of E-Learning Program in Master of Information Technology Engineering at Shiraz University

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fahimeh Kakaee 1
  • Rezavan Hakimzadeh 2
1 M.A. Graduated in Adult Education, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor of Curriculum Development & Instruction Methods, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The development of communication technologies, by bringing e-learning to academic areas, provided a proper ground for the rapid development of higher education. But at the same time, educational quality of the programs became a concern of the present time. The purpose of conducting the present study is to evaluate the quality of educational programs of Virtual University of Shiraz, on the basis of ten criteria of content, communication and interaction, flexibility and consistency, justification of students, technical support, instructional support, evaluation strategies, feedback, teaching strategies and online leadership. The research method is descriptive survey and the statistical population consisted of 92 graduate students of Virtual University of Shiraz in information technology. The required information was collected using a researcher-made questionnaire on five-point Likert scale. The mentioned questionnaire reliability was calculated using Cronbach's alpha coefficient equal to 0.96. Students evaluated the quality of the criteria of content, flexibility and consistency, technical support, evaluation strategies and online leadership as lower than average and the quality of the criteria of communication and interaction, justification of students, instructional support, feedback and teaching strategies as average. In general, the results of this study showed, the quality of virtual courses of Shiraz University is not evaluated as desirable from the perspective of students.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • educational quality
  • e-learning
  • Higher Education
  1. Aghakasiri, Z. (2006). Evaluating e-Learning programs in Tehran universities from the perspective of teachers and students of these programs. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Kharazmi, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).
  2. Chen, C. M. (2009). Personalized e-learning system with self-regulated learning assisted mechanisms for promoting learning performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 8816-8829.
  3. Chen, M. P. (2009). An evaluation of the ELNP e-learning quality assurance program: Perspectives of gap analysis and innovation diffusion. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 18-33.
  4. Deepwell, F. (2007). Embedding quality in e-learning implementation through evaluation. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 34-43.
  5. Ehlers, U-D (2007). Quality literacy competencies for quality development in education and e-learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 96-108.
  6. Ehlers, U-D. (2004). Quality in e-learning from a learner's perspective. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. Retrieved from August 24, 2011, from http://www.eurodl.org/?article=101
  7. Faramrzian, A. A (2003). Online universities and higher education transformation. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://library.tebyan.net/fa/ viewer/text/74774/1 (in Persian).
  8. Farasatkhah, M. (2009). Iranian university and problem of quality. Tehran: Agah. (in Persian).
  9. Fresen, J. W. (2005). Quality assurance in online (web-supported) learning in higher education: An exploratory study. Ph.D. Dissartation, Departement of curriculu studies, university of Peritoria, Retrieved March 17, 2010, from http://www.ndltd.org
  10. Fresen, J. W. (2007). A taxonomy of factors to promote quality web-supported learning. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(3), 351-362.
  11. Fresen, J. W., & Boyd, L. G. (2005). Caught in the web of quality. International Journal of Educational Development, 25, 317-331.
  12. Ghaedi, B. (2006). Assessment of e-learning curriculum from the perspective of computer engineering’s teachers and students of Elm O Sanat University Unpublished Master's Thesis, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).
  13. Hasan, A., & Laaser, W. (2010). Higher education distance learning in Portugal-state of the art and current policy issues. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://www.eurodl.org/ index. php?p=archives&year=2010&halfyear=2
  14. Hejazi, E., Bazargan, A., & Eshaghi, F. (2008). Step by step guide for quality self evaluation in the university system. Tehran: University of Tehran press. (in Persian).
  15. Hussin, H., Bunyarit, F., & Hussein, R. (2009). Instructional design & e-learning. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(1), 4-19.
  16. Mariasingam, M. A., & Hanna, D. E. (2006). Benchmarking quality in online degree programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, (4)3. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla
  17. McLoughlin, C., & Visser, T. (2003). Quality in e-learning: Are there universal indicators? In C. McLoughlin, P. LeCornu, & W. Jackson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th ODLAA Conference. Canberra: ODLAA.
  18. Mihai, A. (2009). Teaching European studies online: The challenge of quality assurance. Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. Retrieved August 24, 2011 from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2009&halfyear =2
  19. Noorollahi, S. (2010). Evaluating compliance of virtual programs according to the criteria of E-Learning’s quality in Oloom e Hadis Faculty. Unpublished Master's Thesis. University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).
  20. Official website of Tehran university. Retrieved from http://utec.ut.ac.ir/web/ utec/24/-/journal_content/56/10125/22715/_/
  21. Ozkan, S., & Koseler, R. (2009). Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: An empirical investigation. Computers & Education, 53, 1285-1296.
  22. Peachter, M., Maier, B., & Macher, D. (2010). Students’ expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction. Computers & Education, 54, 222-229.
  23. Penn State University. (2008). Penn State quality assurance e-learning design standards. Retreived from www.sc.edu/cte/larryragan/doc/designstandards.pdf
  24.  Rabiei, M. (2009). Evaluating effectiveness of e-learning program in Ferdowsi University from the perspective of it’s teachers and students. Unpublished Master's Thesis). Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).
  25. Rabiei, M., Mohebi Amin, S., & Haji Khaje Loo, S. (2010). Evaluating the internal quality of e-learning curriculum in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. Horizons of Medical Education Development, 4(1), 29-36. (in Persian).
  26. Rahmani, B. (2005). Educational program analysis in E-learning trial of Hadis Sciences Faculty. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Allameh Tabatabaei, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).
  27. Rajasingham, L. (2011). New challenges facing universities in the internet-driven global environment. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://www.eurodl.org/?article=430
  28. Rubbin, Y. (2009). AQA approaches to e-learning evaluation criteria. Quality assurance of e-learning; Sigtuna, Sweden, October 7-8, 2009.
  29. Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers & Education, 49, 396-413.
  30. Shelton, K. (2010). A quality scorecard for the administration of online education programs: A delphi study. Ph.D Dissertation, the graduate college, university of Nebraska. Retrieved March 17, 2010, from www.digitalcommons. unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039
  31. Southern Regional Education Board. (2006). Standards for quality online courses. Retrieved from http://publications.sreb.org/2006/06t05_standards _quality_online_courses.pdf
  32. Southern Regional Education Board. (2007). Evaluation Criteria for SREB-SCORE Learning Objects. Retrieved from www.publications.sreb.org/2007/ 07t05_checklist_eval_sreb-score.pdf
  33. Southern Regional Education Board. (2009). Guidelines for professional development of online teachers. Retrieved from www.publications.sreb.org /2009/09T01_guide_profdev_online_teach.pdf
  34. Sun, P. CH., Tsai, R. J., Finger, C., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful E-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50, 1183-1202.
  35. Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds) Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 13-45.
  36. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education. (2008). E-learning quality aspects and criteria for evaluation of e-learning in higher education (publication No: 2008:11R). Retrieved from www.eadtu.nl/e-xcellencelabel/ files/0811R.pdf
  37. The Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2000). Quality on the line: benchmarks for success in internet based distance education. Retrieved from www.nea.org/assets/docs/he/qualityontheline.pdf
  38. Thompson, M. (2004). Evaluating online courses and program. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2), 63-84.
  39. WCET. UT TeleCampus, and Instructional Technology Council. (2009). Best practice strategies to promote academic integrity in online education. Retrieved from, http://wcet.wiche.edu/sites/default/files/docs/resources/best-practices-pro mote-academic-integrity-2009.pdf
  40. Yeung, D. (2002). Toward an effective quality assurance of web based learning: The perspective of academic staff. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(2). Retrieved from www.westga.edu
  41. Zidat, S., & Djoudi, M. (2006). Online evaluation of Ibn Sina e-learning environment. Information Technology Journal, 5(3), 409-415.