The Impact of Interaction between Timing of Feedback Provision in Distance E-Learning and Learning Styles on achieving Learning Outcomes among Arab Open University Students
More details
Hide details
Department of Educational Technology, College of Education, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, SAUDI ARABIA
Online publish date: 2018-05-13
Publish date: 2018-05-13
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(7):3053–3068
The present study aims to identify the impact of interaction between timing of providing feedback and technologies delivered in E-Learning environments (Immediate – Delayed) & interaction with learning style (Active – Reflective) on developing the design and production skills of educational e-blogging; and satisfaction with e-learning environment. The sample consisted of (67) students from the Arab Open University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Dammam Branch. The participants were divided into four experimental groups according to the design Factorial (2 × 2): Group 1: (19) students with active learning style provided with immediate feedback; Group 2: (17) students with active learning style provided with delayed feedback; Group 3: (15) reflective students provided with immediate feedback; Group 4: (16) reflective students provided with delayed feedback. The tools include observation card, satisfaction scale with e-learning environment and learning style scale. The results showed statistically significant differences between the mean scores of the experimental groups, which received immediate feedback in acquiring the design and production skills of blogging and satisfaction with e-learning environment. The results also showed that students with active learning style were superior in their performance on each of the performance practical skills for the design and production of blogs and satisfaction with e-learning environment.
Abu-Auad, F. M., & Noafl, M. B. (2012). Validity and reliability significant learning styles scale for –Felder, Soloman. and the degree of preference for Jordan universities students. Demascus University Journal, 28(1), 483-445.
Abu-Hashem, E. M. (2010). Constructive validity of Felder and Silverman learning style model for university students. King Saud University. Journal of King Saud university for educational sciences and Islamic. (35), 1-24.
Afifi, M. K., & Alamri, S. S. (2014). Effective principles in designing e-course in light of learning theories. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(1).‏
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach (Vol. 722). Springer Science & Business Media.‏
Chang, N. (2011). Pre-Service Teachers’ Views: How Did E-Feedback through Assessment Facilitate Their Learning? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 16-33.‏.
Chen, G. D., Chang, C. K., & Wang, C. Y. (2008). Ubiquitous learning website: Scaffold learners by mobile devices with information-aware techniques. Computers & Education, 50(1), 77-90.‏
Collison, S., Davis, C. J., Heilemann, M., Oxton, J., Powers, D., Rutter, R., & Sherry, P. (2006). Blog Design Solutions. Friends of ED.‏.
DeLucenay, A. J., Conn, K. M., & Corigliano, A. (2017). An evaluation of the impact of immediate compared to delayed feedback on the development of counselling skills in pharmacy students. Pharmacy Education, 17.‏.
Evans, C., & Waring, M. (2011). Student teacher assessment feedback preferences: The influence of cognitive styles and gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(3), 271-280.‏
Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering education, 78(7), 674-681.‏.
Filippidis, S. K., &Tsoukalas, I. A. (2009). On the use of adaptive instructional images based on the sequential–global dimension of the Felder–Silverman learning style theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(2), 135-150.
Freney, M. H. P., & Wood, D. (2008). The Delivery and Management of Feedback and Assessment in an E-learning Environment. The international journal of learning, 15(2), 169-178.
Harrati, N., Bouchrika, I., Tari, A., & Ladjailia, A. (2016). Exploring user satisfaction for e-learning systems via usage-based metrics and system usability scale analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 463-471.‏
Harvey, H. L., Parahoo, S., & Santally, M. (2017). Should gender differences be considered when assessing student satisfaction in the online learning environment for millennials? Higher Education Quarterly, 71(2), 141-158.‏
Hsu, C. C. (2011). Factors affecting webpage’s visual interface design and style. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 1315-1320.‏
Hsu, C. C. (2012). Evaluation criteria for blog design and analysis of causal relationships using factor analysis and dematel. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 187-193.‏
Huang, Y. M., Kuo, Y. H., Lin, Y. T., & Cheng, S. C. (2008). Toward interactive mobile synchronous learning environment with context-awareness service. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1205-1226.‏
Hwang, G. J., & Chang, H. F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023-1031.‏
Khamis, M. A. (2009). E- Supporting. Egypt Educational technology, 19(2), 1-2.
Lefevre, D., & Cox, B. (2017). Delayed instructional feedback may be more effective, but is this contrary to learners’ preferences?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1357-1367.‏
Litzinger, T. A., Lee, S. H., Wise, J. C., & Felder, R. M. (2007). A psychometric study of the index of learning styles©. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 309-319.
Narciss, S. (2013). Designing and Evaluating Tutoring Feedback Strategies for digital learning environments on the basis of the Interactive Tutoring Feedback Model. Digital Education Review, (23), 7-26.‏.
Narciss, S., Sosnovsky, S., Schnaubert, L., Andrès, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., & Melis, E. (2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education, 71, 56-76.‏
Nortcliffe, A., & Middleton, A. (2011). Smartphone feedback: Using an iPhone to improve the distribution of audio feedback. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 48(3), 280-293.‏
Raspopovic, M., & Jankulovic, A. (2017). Performance measurement of e-learning using student satisfaction analysis. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(4), 869-880.‏
Sorensen, P. (2008). Feedback and Assessment. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 85-105.‏.
Taylor, P., Schugar, J., & Penny, C. (2014, March). Reinventing the Classroom with Google+. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2014, No. 1, pp. 1352-1353).‏.
Vandewaetere, M., Desmet, P., & Clarebout, G. (2011). The contribution of learner characteristics in the development of computer-based adaptive learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 118-130.‏
Violante, M. G., & Vezzetti, E. (2015). Virtual interactive e‐learning application: An evaluation of the student satisfaction. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 23(1), 72-91.‏
Virtanen, M. A., Kääriäinen, M., Liikanen, E., & Haavisto, E. (2017). The comparison of students’ satisfaction between ubiquitous and web-based learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 22(5), 2565-2581.‏
Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164.‏
Xu, Y. (2010). Examining the Effects of Digital Feedback on Student Engagement and Achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 275-291.‏
Zywno, M. S. (2003, June). A contribution to validation of score meaning for Felder-Soloman’s index of learning styles. American Society for Engineering Education annual conference & exposition, 119, 1-5.‏.