CC-BY 4.0

An Investigation of the Digital Teaching Book Compared to Traditional Books in Distance Education of Teacher Education Programs

Rahme Uygarer 1  ,  
Near East University, NORTH CYPRUS
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 2017;13(8):5365–5377
Publish date: 2017-06-15
The present study aimed to investigate the efficiency level of digital teaching materials for higher education programs. The present study had a mixed research methodology to gather in-depth and rich context. Twenty participants were chosen from a distance education program of the Pedagogical Formation (2014-2015) at Near East University in Nicosia in North Cyprus. The sample of the present study was selected by using the purposeful sampling method. The participants who took the course (instructional technology and material design), half of them used electronic sources and the other half used traditional sources during the distance education. The participants’ answers were categorized into who was taking distance education with digital materials and who was taking distance education with non-digital materials. The results indicate that the participants were aware of the facilities of using e-books and they were content with the facilities of using an electronic book. The participants’ view show that using electronic book has function on being successful and interactive in their education. At the same time, using electronic book provide chances to students reach multiple sources. Thus, the participants’ answers in qualitative data also indicate that using multimedia is necessity to increase level of motivation students in their study and using electronic book and electronic sources provide unlimited learning platforms for students. Thus, students’ level of attention and permanent learning are increased.
Rahme Uygarer   
Near East University, Faculty of Education, Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, North Cyprus
1. Ahmed, Y., & Raheem, A. (2012). Interactions quality in MOODLE as perceived by learners and its relation with some variables. Turkish online journal of distance education, 13(3), 375-389.
2. Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The journal of educational research, 97(4), 171-185.
3. Balcı, A (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma [Research in social science], Ankara: Pegem Publication.
4. Benigno, V., & Trentin, G. (2000). The evaluation of online courses. Journal of computer assisted learning, 16, 259-270.
5. Brajković, M. (2012). Mogućnosti koje nudi program za prijelom. Baccalaureus work - Undergraduate programme. Grafički fakultet. [Mentor: Mandić, Lidija].
6. Bravo, E., Mihaela Enache, M., Vicenc Fernandez,V., & Simo,P. (2010). An innovative teaching practice based on online channels: A qualitative approach. World journal on educational technology, 2(2), 113-123.
7. Cain Miller, C., & Bosman, J. “E-Books Outsell Print Books at Amazon.” New York Times, May 19, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/technology/20amazon.html.
8. Ciampa, K. (2012c). Reading in the digital age; Using electronic books as a teaching tool for beginning readers. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 38(2), 1-26.
9. Conley, T. G., & Udry, C. R. (2010). Learning about a new technology: Pineapple in Ghana. The American Economic Review, 35-69.
10. Copley, J. (2007). Audio and video podcasts of lectures for campus-based students: production and evaluation of student use. Innovations in education and teaching international, 44(4), 387-399.
11. Costinela-Luminita, D. (2011). Security issues in e-learning platforms. World journal on educational technology, 3(3), 153-167.
12. Craciunas, S., & Elsek, I. (2009). The standard model of an e-learning platform. Bucharest: Romania.
13. Cubukcu, F. (2008). Enhancing vocabulary development and reading comprehension through metacognitive strategies. Issues in Educational Research, 18(1), 1-11.
14. Dahalan, N., Hasan, H., Hassan, F., Zakaria, Z., & Noor, W., A., W., M. (2013). Engaging students on-line: does gender matter in adoption of learning material design? World journal on educational technology, 5(3), 413-419.
15. Duffy, P. (2008). Engaging the YouTube Google-Eyed Generation: Strategies for Using Web 2.0 in Teaching and Learning. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 6(2), 119 - 130, available online at www.ejel.org.
16. Fernandez V., Simo, P., & Sallan, J. M. (2009). Podcasting: A new technological tool to facilitate good practice in higher education. Computers & education, 53(2), 385-392.
17. Schneller, C, & Holmberg, C. (2014). IDEAL Impact of Distance Education on Adult Learning Distance Education in European Higher Education-The Students. Norway: UNESCO.
18. Gebregiorgis, S. A., & Altmann, J. (2015). IT service platforms: their value creation model and the impact of their level of openness on their adoption. Procedia Computer Science, 68, 173-187.
19. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. Handbook of reading research, 3, 403-422.
20. P. B. Mosenthan, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 403-422). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Hsieh, P. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (2009). The instructional effect of online reading strategies and learning styles on student academic achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 36-50.
22. Hsiuli, L. (2016). The Effect of Presentation Types and Flow on E-Book Purchase Intention. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(3), 669-686.
23. Hsu, C. L., Lin, Y. H., Chen, M. C., Chang, K. C., & Hsieh, A. Y. (2017). Investigating the determinants of e-book adoption. Program, 51(1), 2-16.
24. Im, I., Hong, S., & Kang, M. S. (2011). An international comparison of technology adoption testing the UTAUT model. Information & Management, 48(1), 1-8.
25. Karemaker, A., Pitchford, N. J., & O’Malley, C. (2008). Using whole-word multimedia software to support literacy acquisition: A comparision with traditional books. Educational and Child Psychology, 25(3), 97-118.
26. Lissitsa, S., & Chachashvili-Bolotin, S. (2016). Life satisfaction in the internet age–Changes in the past decade. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 197-206.
27. Lee, S. (2013). An integrated adoption model for e-books in a mobile environment: evidence from South Korea. Telematics and Informatics, 30(2), 165-176.
28. Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality in distance education: Focus on on-line learning. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report Series, 29(4).
29. Miller, T. W., & King, F. B. (2003). Distance education: Pedagogy and best practices in the new millennium. Internal journal of leadership in education, 6(3), 283-297.
30. Morgan, P. L., & Sideridis, G. D. (2006). Contrasting the effectiveness of fluency interventions for students with or at risk for learning disabilities: A multilevel random coefficient modeling meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 21, 190-210.
31. Motteram, G., & Forrester, G. (2005). Becoming online distance learner: What can be learned from student’s experiences of induction to distance programs? Distance education, 26, 261-298.
32. Mukhlif, Z., & Amir, Z. (2017). Investigating the Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies employed by Iraqi EFL Undergraduate Students. Arab World English Journal, 8(1).
33. Mukhlif, Z. (2012). Metacognitive Online Reading Strategies among Iraqi Students. (Unpublished Master’s thesis). University Kebangssan, Malaysia.
34. Noor, N. M., Azman, H., Nor, N. F. M., Hamat, A., & Bakar, N. A. (2011). Development and Evaluation of the Interactive English Language Literacy System (i-ELLS) for online reading comprehension 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature, The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies., 17(special issue), 19-30.
35. Otta, M., & Tavella, M. (2010). Motivation and engagement in computer-based learning tasks: investigating key contributing factors. World journal on educational technology, 2(1), 1-15.
36. Pal, S., Mukherjee, S., Choudhury, P., Nandi, S., & Debnath, N. C. (2013). M - Learning inuniversity campus scenario - design and implementation issues. IEEE international conference on industrial technology (ICIT), 1851-1856.
37. Rickman, J., et al. “A Campus-Wide E-Textbook Initiative.” EDUCAUSE Review Online, July 30, 2009. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/campus-wide-e-textbook-initiative.
38. Riva, G., & Galimberti, C. (1997). The psychology of cyberspace: a sociocognitive framework to computer mediated communication. New Ideas in Psychology, 15(2), 141-158.
39. Sanchez, R. A., & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Motivational factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in human behavior, 26, 1632-1640.
40. Sideries, G. D., & Scanlon, D. (2006). Motivational issues in learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 131-135.
41. Stella, A., & Gnanam, A. (2004). Quality assurance in distance education: The challenges to be addressed. Higher education, 47, 143-160.
42. Tang, T., & Austin, M. (2009). Student’s perceptions of teaching technologies, application of technologies, and academic performance. Computers & education, 53, 1241–1255.
43. Tham, C. M., & Werner, J. M. (2005). Designing and evaluating e-learning in higher education: review and recommendations. Journal of leadership and organizational studies, 11(2), 15-25.
44. Vasileiou, M., Hartley, R., & Rowley, J. (2009). An overview of the e-book marketplace. Online Information Review, 33(1), 173-192.
45. Verhallen, M., Bus, A. G., & Jong, M. T. (2006). The promise of multimedia stories for kindergarten children at risk. Journal of Educational Pshchology, 98, 410-419.
46. Vrasidas, C., Zembylas, M., & Chamberlain, R. (2003). Complexities in the evaluation ofdistance education and virtual schooling. Educational media international, 40(3/4), 201-208.
47. Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D. C., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 637-662.
48. Wei, Y. (2005). The relationship between phonological awareness and reading ability of Thai students in English and Thai in primary schools of Thailand (Doctoral dissertation).
49. Willis, B. (1993). Distance education: A practical guide. Englewood cliffs, NJ: Educational technology publications.
50. Wood, J. (2015). Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters. Nelson Education.
51. Wu, M. D., & Chen, S. C. (2011). Graduate students’ usage of and attitudes towards e-books: experiences from Taiwan. Program, 45(3), 294-307.
52. Wu, M. C., & Kuo, F. Y. (2008). An empirical investigation of habitual usage and past usage on technology acceptance evaluations and continuance intention. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 39(4), 294-307.
53. Zhou, T. Lu. Y., & Wang, B. (2010). Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 760-767.
54. Zoran, A. G., & Rozman, K. (2010). Student’s perception of using MOODLE. 4th International conference proceedings, Koper.