ساخت‎گرایی و ارتباط‌گرایی در آموزش‎ الکترونیکی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

2 استاد گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

3 دانش‌آموخته دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف از این پژوهش تبیین ساخت‎گرایی و ارتباط‎گرایی در آموزش الکترونیکی می‎باشد. روش پژوهش از نوع تحقیقات کاربردی و از نوع پیمایشی و غیرآزمایشی می‎باشد. جامعه آماری پژوهش، دانشجویان و استادان آموزش الکترونیکی در مراکز آموزش الکترونیکی وابسته به وزارت علوم و دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی در سطح کشور در سال تحصیلی 96-1395 بود که به ترتیب 60568 دانشجو و 1050 استاد بودند و در مجموع تعداد استادان و دانشجویان 61618 تن بودند. پژوهش بر روی نمونه‎ای به حجم 462 نفر مشتمل بر 289 مرد و 173 زن که با استفاده از جدول مورگان و به صورت تصادفی انتخاب شده بود، اجرا گردید. برای انجام این پژوهش از پرسش‎نامه محقق ساخته ساخت‎گرایی و ارتباط‎گرایی استفاده گردید. روایی پرسش‎نامه از طریق کسب نظرات صاحب‎نظران مورد تأیید قرار گرفت. برای پایایی پرسش‎نامه ضریب آلفای کرونباخ محاسبه گردید که برای پرسش‎نامه ساخت‎گرایی 0/956 و برای پرسش‎نامه ارتباط‎گرایی 0/955 حاصل گردید. با توجه به یافته‎های این تحقیق عناصر یادگیری مستقل، تشکیل مفاهیم و مهارت‎های تفکر سطح بالا، یادگیری مبتنی برحل مسأله از مهم‌ترین عناصر ساخت‎گرایی و عناصر یادگیری فراتر از کتاب و برنامه درسی، تکمیل و تقویت ساخت شناخت ذهنی از طریق ارتباط، تکمیل عینیت‎گرایی در یاددهی یادگیری از طریق ارتباط نیز از مهم‌ترین عناصر ارتباط‎گرایی در آموزش الکترونیکی می‌باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Constructivism and Connectivism in E-Learning

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Edjtehadi 1
  • NaderGoli Ghourchian 2
  • Noor-Al-Deen Mirzaee 3
1 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Full Professor, Department of Educational Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 Ph.D. Graduated of Educational Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

This study aims to explain constructivism and connectivism in electronic learning (e-learning). The method of research is applied, descriptive and non-experimental. Statistical population of the study was e-learning students and professors in e-learning centers affiliated to Ministry of Science and Islamic Azad University in the country in academic year of 2016-17 who were 60568 students and 1050 professors and totally the number of professors and students were 61618. The study was conducted on a sample of 462 including 289 men and 173 women who were randomly selected using Morgan table. To conduct the study, a researcher-made questionnaire of constructivism and connectivism was used. Validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by taking expert's views. For reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated which was achieved 0.956 for constructivism questionnaire and 0.955 for connectivism questionnaire. According to the findings of the study, independent learning elements, concept formation and high-level thinking skills, and learning based on problem-solving are the most important elements of constructivism and learning beyond textbook and curriculum, completing and improving structure of subjective cognition through communication, and completing objectivism in teaching learning through communication are also the most important elements of connectivism in e-learning.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • e-learning
  • Constructivism
  • connectivism
Anderson, T. (2008). Theory and practice of online learning (2nd edition). Edmonton: Athabasca University.

Barber W., King, S., & Buchanan, S. (2015). Problem based learning and authentic assessment in digital pedagogy: Embracing the role of collaborative communities. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 13(2), 59-67.

Berge, Z. L. (2002). Active, interactive, and reflective learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(20), 181-190.

Chen, S. (2007). Instructional design strategies for intensive online courses: An objectivist-constructivist blended approach. Interactive Online Learning, 6(1), 72-86.

Davis, N. M. (2003). Creating a learning community in the virtual classroom. In D.R. Walling (edn), Virtual Schooling: Issues in the Development of e-Learning Policy, 77-83, Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, Bloomington, IN.

Downes, S. (2010). New technology supporting informal learning. Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, 2(1), 27-33.

Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72.

Gilster, P. (1997). Digital literacy. New York: Wiley.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions, In C. J. Bonk and C.R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.

Hill, W. (1990). Learning: A survey of psychological interpretations. New York: Harper Collins.

Hunter, J. (2015). Technology integration and high possibility classrooms: Building from TPACK. Routledge.

Kennedy, J. (2014). Characteristics of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009- 2012. Interactive Online Learning, 13(1), 1-15.

Laurillard, D. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies. Computer Supportive Collaborative Learning, 4, 5-20.

Low, L. Y., Low, L. T., & Koo V. C. (2003). Multimedia learning systems: A future interactive educational tool. Internet and Higher Education, 6, 25-40.

Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63(8), 760-769.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological, pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017-1054.

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Peter, S., & Deimann, M. (2013). On the role of openness in education: A historical reconstruction. Open Praxis, 5, 7-14.

Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172.

Rogers, E. M. (1962/1995). Diffusions of innovations. New York: The Free Press.

Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.

Scott, K., Sorokti, K., & Merrell, J. (2015). Learning beyond the classroom within an enterprise social network. Internet & Higher Education, 29, 75-90.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1-13.

Siemens, G., & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for Learning. University of Manitoba.

Siemens, G., Gasevic, D., & Dawson, J. (2015). Preparing for the digital university: A review of the current state of distance, blended and online learning. Athabaska University.

Skinner, B. E. (1958). Teaching machines. Science, 128, 969-977.

Tait, A., & Mills, R. (2003) Rethinking learner support in distance education. London: Routledge Falmer.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.