Comprehensive Technology-Based Learning (CTBL): A Comparison Between Various Types of Quantitative Courses

Open access

Abstract

Learning quantitative courses in higher education is difficult because students need to understand complex principles and solve complicated questions. In these courses, new knowledge depends on prior knowledge and when gaps in students’ understanding occur, they are difficult to overcome. The study examines a new model called comprehensive technology-based learning (CTBL) designed to overcome these difficulties.

The problem is addressed by full coverage of the curriculum in a variety of textual and video learning tools, as well as an ongoing process of diagnosis and prognosis, designed to overcome students’ difficulties and knowledge gaps. The study examined the students’ attitudes towards CTBL model relating to three quantitative courses (n1=39, n2=25, n3=18, ntotal). It points out that a quantitative course based on CTBL significantly nurtures students’ learning. Improving learning and overcoming knowledge gaps are influenced by several characteristics: Full coverage of the curriculum, excellent learning experience, repetition of the material without limitations, flexibility to learn outside the classroom, a variety of means to choose which ones are more appropriate, and making learning much easier. Beyond that, the diagnosis and prognosis done by the lecturer cause the instructor to intervene in real time, to solve the students’ difficulties on an ongoing basis.

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2004), The intellectual development of science and engineering students. Part 2: Teaching to Promote Growth. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(4), 280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00817.x

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New York: Basic Books.

Ghilay, Y. (2018). Math Courses in Higher Education: Improving Learning by Screencast Technology. GSTF Journal on Education (JEd), 4(2), 1-6.

Ghilay, Y. (2017a). Online Learning in Higher Education. Nova Science Publishers-New-York.

Ghilay, Y. (2017b). ODL: Online Distance Learning of Quantitative Courses in Higher Education. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 4(18), 62-72.

Ghilay, Y. & Ghilay, R. (2015). FBL: Feedback Based Learning in Higher Education. Higher Education Studies, 5(5), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/hes.v5n5p1

Hartsell, T. & Yuen, S. (2006). Video streaming in online learning. AACE Journal, 14(1), 31–43.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007), The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hesse, J. (1989), From naive to knowledgeable. The Science Teacher.

Knight, P. T., & Yorke, M. (2003), Employability and good learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 3-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1356251032000052294

Mayer, R. E. (2009) Multimedia Learning, Cambridge University Press.

McAleese, M., Bladh, A., Berger, V., Bode, C., Muehlfeit, J., Petrin, T., Schiesaro, A., & Tsoukalis, L. (2013), Report to the European commission on improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Pang, K. (2009). Video-driven multimedia, web-based training in the corporate sector: Pedagogical equivalence and component effectiveness. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3).

Peterson, E. (2007). Incorporating screencasts in online teaching. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(3). [Accessed 1.08.2018]. Available from Internet: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/495/935.

Poulos, A., & Mahony, M. J. (2008), Effectiveness of feedback: The students’ perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2), 143-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930601127869

Race, P. (2005), Making learning happen: A guide for post-compulsory education. London: Sage Publications.

Ruffini, M.F. (2012). Screencasting to engage learning. [Accessed 1.08.2018]. Available from Internet: http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/screencasting-engage-learning.

Screencast. (2018). Wikipedia. [Accessed 1.08.2018]. Available from Internet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screencast

Smith, J. G. & Smith, M. R. L. (2012). Screen-Capture Instructional Technology: a Cognitive Tool for Designing a Blended Multimedia Curriculum. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(3), 207–228.

Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V., & Kishi, K. (2010). Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(1), 19–37.

Walker, L. (2010). Quantifying the benefits of narrated screen capture videos. In Steel. C.H., Keppell. M.J., Gerbic. P. & Housego. S. (Eds.) Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future (pp.1031–1034). Sydney: Proceedings ascilite 2010.

Wilson, M., & Scalise, K. (2006), Assessment to improve learning in higher education: The BEAR assessment system. Higher Education, 52(4), 635-663. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-7263-y

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 83 83 17
PDF Downloads 54 54 3