عباسی, فاطمه, پورشهریار, حسین, فتح آبادی, جلیل. (1395). رابطه برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای یادگیری در یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی. فصلنامه فن آوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در علوم تربیتی, 7(2 (پیاپی 26)), 163-191.
فاطمه عباسی; حسین پورشهریار; جلیل فتح آبادی. "رابطه برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای یادگیری در یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی". فصلنامه فن آوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در علوم تربیتی, 7, 2 (پیاپی 26), 1395, 163-191.
عباسی, فاطمه, پورشهریار, حسین, فتح آبادی, جلیل. (1395). 'رابطه برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای یادگیری در یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی', فصلنامه فن آوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در علوم تربیتی, 7(2 (پیاپی 26)), pp. 163-191.
عباسی, فاطمه, پورشهریار, حسین, فتح آبادی, جلیل. رابطه برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای یادگیری در یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی. فصلنامه فن آوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در علوم تربیتی, 1395; 7(2 (پیاپی 26)): 163-191.
رابطه برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای یادگیری در یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی
1کارشناس ارشد روان‌شناسی‌تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
2استادیار گروه روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
3دانشیار گروه روانشناسی تربیتی تحولی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
هدف این پژوهش، بررسی ارتباط بین برداشت یادگیرندگان از مفهوم یادگیری با راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی یادگیری بود. به عبارتی، سهم هر یک از مؤلفه های برداشت یادگیرندگان از مفهوم یادگیری در پیشبینی راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی، در دو گروه یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی مشخص شد و دو گروه مورد مقایسه قرار گرفتند. در این پژوهش، از روش تحقیق همبستگی استفاده شد. جامعه آماری شامل کارمندان مراکز فنی و حرفه ای بود که آموزش مهارت ICDL را دریافت نموده اند. حجم جامعه آماری بالغ بر 18000 نفر می‌باشد که به دلیل حجم بالای جامعه از روش نمونه‌گیری در دسترس استفاده شد. به وسیله جدول کرجسی و مورگان، 376 نفر از یادگیرندگان مهارت ICDL که کارمندان مراکز فنی و حرفهای با مدرک تحصیلی لیسانس و فوق لیسانس بودند، انتخاب شدند. ابزار جمع آوری دادهها، دو پرسش‌نامه راهبردهای یادگیری کرمی و برداشت از مفهوم یادگیری بود که پس از تأیید روایی و پایایی مورد استفاده قرار گرفتند. برای تحلیل دادهها از روشهای آماری رگرسیون چندگانه، آزمون t برای نمونه های مستقلو ضریب همبستگی پیرسون استفاده شد. یافته های به دست آمده از پژوهش، حاکی از ارتباط معنادار بین برداشت یادگیرندگان از مفهوم یادگیری در محیط های یادگیری مجازی و واقعی با راهبردهای شناختی، فراشناختی بود. مؤلفه هایی که بیشترین توان پیشبینی راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی یادگیرندگان فضای مجازی و واقعی را داشتند، برداشت یادگیرندگان به عنوان وظیفه، به خاطر آوردن و درک اطلاعات، و تغییر شخصی بودند.هم‌چنین، کسانی که در محیط های مجازی آموزش دیده بودند، به میزان بیشتری از راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی استفاده می‌کردند.
1MA in Educational Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
3Associate Professor, Department of Evolutionary Educational Psychology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
The purpose of the present research was to investigate the relationship between conceptions of learning with cognitive and metacognitive strategies, and identifying the relative contribution of each of them in predicting learning strategies approaches by virtual space and real space learners and these two groups were compared. Correlational research method was used in this study. The statistical population of this research included staff of professional and technical centers to be fitted that taught ICDL skill. The size of this population was approximately 18000 people due to the high volume that fitted the community of available sampling methods were used. In order to find this, based on Krejcie and Morgan table, 376 employees of the professional and technical centers who had been earlier taught ICDL skill and had the bachelor and Master degree were chosen as sample. The data collection tools were the Karami learning strategies and Conceptions of Learning, after confirming the validity and reliability were used. Data were analyzed using multiple regression test, two independent samples t test and Correlation coefficient. Results indicated that there was significant difference between cognitive and metacognitive, and conceptions of learning by virtual space and real space learners. Results indicated that learning as a duty, remembering and personal change was the meaningful predicting factors of cognitive and metacognitive approaches by virtual space and real space learners. As well as those who were trained in the virtual environment, the amount of cognitive and metacognitive strategies of more use.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, learning, Virtual Space, real space, conceptions of learning
مراجع
Allan, B. (2003). Approaches to learning and academic achievement of Filipino students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164(1), 101-114.
Ally, M. (2008). Foundations educational theory for online learning. In Anderson and G. Sanders (EDS), Theory and practice of online learning, Athabasca; Canada: Athabasca University, 1-31.
Attaran, M. (2004). Globalization information technology and education. Institute for Educational Development and Technology Smart Schools. (in Persian).
Bell, M. W. (2008). Toward a definition of virtual worlds.Virtual Worlds Research, 1(1), 237-283.
Berthold, K., Nuckles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 564-577.
Bliuc, A. M., Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2011). A blended learning approach to teaching foreign policy: Student experiences of learning through face-to-face and online discussion and their relationship to academic performance. Computers & Education, 56(3), 856-864.
Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Wilss, L. A., & Lewis, D. (2000). Learning in formal and informal contexts: Conceptions and strategies of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander university students. Learning and Instruction, 10(5), 393-444.
Clark, C. R. , & Mayer. R. E. (2007). E- learning and the science of instruction. Sanfrancisco:Jossey-bass Pfeiffer.
Coskun, A. (2010). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on the listening performance of beginner students. Novitas-Royal, 4(1), 35-50.
Curran, C. R., Elfrink, V., & Mays, B., (2009). Building a virtual community for nursing education: The town of mirror lake. Nursing Education, 48(1), 30-35.
Dahlin, B., & Watkins, D. (2000). The role of repetition in the processes of memorizing and understanding: A comparison of the views of German and Chinese secondary school students in Hong Kong. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(1), 65-84.
Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32.
Davis, H., Vetere, F., Ashkanasy, S., Dyson, G., Schofield, P., Thompson, K., et al. (2008). Towards social connection for young people with cancer. Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction:Designing for Habitus and Habitat, 319-322. Doi: 10.1145/1517744.1517804.
De Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game-based learning. England: JISC. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://videogamelc.bgsu. wikispaces.net/file/view/de% 20Freitas%202007.pdf
De Lucia, A., & Francese, R. (2008). Development and evaluation of a virtual campus onsecond life: The case of second DMI. Computers and Education, 52(1), 220-233.
Dillenbourg, P., & Schneider, D. (2002). Virtual learning environments, In A. Dimitracopoulou (Ed). Proceedings of the 3rd Hellenic Conference Information and communication technologies in education, 3-18.
Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behavior and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 407-428. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.009.
Ferguson, R. (2011). Meaningful learning and creativity in virtual worlds. Else VIER, Ltd. All rights reserved. Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 102-111.
Holmberg, K., & Huvila, I. (2008). Learning together apart: Distance education in a virtual world. Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet, 13(10), 2033-2178.
Holmes, J. (2007). Designing agents to support learning by explaining. Computers and Education, 48(4), 523-525.
Hong, Y. Y., & Salili, F. (2000). Challenges ahead for research on Chinese students’ learning motivation in the new millennium. Psychology in Chinese Societies, 1(2), 1-12.
Hunter. M. S., & Linder, C. V. (2005). How to study? Experimental Psychology, 130(2), 224- 237.
Jafarkhani, F. (2013). Application of virtual environment for students: Having learning disorders. Exceptional Education, 5(113), 68-78. (in Persian).
Karami, A., Delavar, A., Bahrami, H., & Karimi, Y. (2006). Compiling a tool for evaluation of learning and studying strategies, and determining its relationship with academic progress. Psychology, 4(9), 400-412. (in Persian).
Kern, R., & Ware, P. (2008). Network-based language teaching, In: K King and N. Hornberger (editors).Encyclopedia of language and education(Second edition).New York: Springer, pp. 1374-1385.
Lai, P. Y., & Chan, K. W. (2005). A structural model of conceptions of learning, achievement motivation and learning strategies of Hong Kong teacher education students. Australian Association of Research in Education Parramatta Conference, 8(1), 16-22.
Li, W. T., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Relational analysis of college chemistry- major students' conceptions of learning and approaches to learning chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 555-565.
Liang, J. C., & Tsai C. C. (2010). Relational analysis of college science-major students' epistemological beliefs toward science and conceptions of learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(17), 2273-2289.
Livingstone, D., Kemp, J., & Edgar, E. (2008). From multi-user environment to 3D virtual learning environment. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 16(3), 139-150.
Marton, F., Dall'Alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3), 277-300.
McLean, M. (2001). Can we relate conceptions of learning to student academic achievement? Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 399-413.
Minocha, S., & Reeves, A. (2010). Design of learning spaces in 3D virtual worlds: An empirical investigation of second life. Learning Media and Technology, 35(2), 111-137.
Omale, N., Hung, W. C., Luetkehans, L., & Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (2009). Learning in 3-D multi-user environments: Exploring the use of unique 3-D attributes for online problem-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 480-495.
Pre- Reviewed Journal on the Internet, 17(1), 1-2.
Purdie, N., & Hattie, J. (2002). Assessing students' conceptions of learning. Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 2(1), 17-32.
Rezaei, A. (2011). Relationship between epistemological beliefs and conceptions of learning in students with surface- learning and deep-learning approaches. Advances in Cognitive Science, 13(1), 2011.
Rosário, P., & Grácio, M. L. (2007). Voix d’élèves sur l’aprentissage à l’entrée et à la sortie de l’université: Un regard phénoménographique. Revue des Sciences del’ Éducation, 33(1), 237-251.
Sadi, O. (2014). The Turkish adaptation of the conceptions of learning science questionnaire; The study of validity and reliability. Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 4(2), 2146-7463.
Saleeb, N., & Dafoulas, G. (2010). Analogy between student perception of educational space dimensions and size perspective in 3D virtual worlds versus physical world. International Journal of Engineering, 4(3), 201-261.
Salmon, G. (2009). The future for (second) life and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 526-538. Doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00967.X.
Sarmad, Z., Bazargan, A., & Hejazi, E. (2010). Research methods in the behavioral sciences. Tehran: Agah Publishers. (in Persian).
Schleifer, L., Dull, L. F., & Richard, B. (2009). Meta-cognition and performance in the accounting classroom. Issues in Accounting Education, 24(3), 339-367.
Schulz, M., & Robnagel, C. S. (2010). Informal workplace learning: An exploration of age differences in learning competence. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 383-399.
Seif, A. A., & Fathabadi, J. (2009). Study approaches and relationship with educational attainment, gender and educational experience at the university. Daneshvar (Raftar)Journal of Shahed University, 15(33), 29-40.
Seif, A. A., (2009). Educational psychology, psychology of learning and instruction. Tehran: Doran Publishers. (in Persian).
Sköld, O. (2012). The effects of virtual space on learning: A literature review. Pre- Reviewed Journal on the Internet, 17(1), 1-2.
Song, H. (2004). The perceptions of college students regarding the instructional quality of online courses delivered via WebCT. Journal of Education Psychology, 80(4), 415-523.
Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the displacement of learning: British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 502-511.
Tsai, C. C., & Khuo, P. C. (2008). Cram school students' conceptions of learning and learning science in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 30(3), 353-375. Doi:10.1080/09500690701191425.
Warburton, S. (2009). Second in higher education: Assessing potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 414-426.
Weinstein, C. E., & Hume, L. M. (1998). Study strategies for life long learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 14, 227-235.
Yang, C. (2005). Learning strategy use of Chinese PhD students of social sciences in Australian universities. Griffith University, Doctoral Dissertation.
ابتدای صفحه