Differences Between Regular and Distance Education in a Teacher’s Training Program

Open access

Abstract

The aim of this research was to study the differences in social presence and autonomy concerning the two methods of education used in a training program for science teachers in the years 2015-2016. The first method was the traditional face to face and the other was the Distance Education method. In particular, the study focused on whether there are differences in the social presence and autonomy between the two teaching methods, and the teaching experience of the participants. A closed-type questionnaire of Likert type was used to collect the data, while t-test for independent samples was used for statistical analysis. The study indicated differences in the social presence and autonomy between the two methods of teaching.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Akcaoglu M. & Lee E. (2016). Increasing Social Presence in Online Learning through Small Group Discussions. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 17(3) 1-17.

  • 2. Al-Harthi A. (2010). Learner Self-Regulation in Distance Education: A Cross Cultural Study. The American Journal of Distance Education 24(3) 135-150. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2010.498232

  • 3. Anastasiadis P. (2004). Open and Distance Learning Education - Main Principles Rethymno. Retrieved from http://www.edc.uoc.gr/~panas/UoCrete/VC%20Dimotiko%20Sxoleio/Notes%20Vc/Master%20DL3.doc

  • 4. Anderson T. & Dron J. (2011). Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 12(3) 80-97.

  • 5. Andrade M. S. (2015). Teaching Online: A Theory-based Approach to Student Success. Journal of Education and Training Studies 3(5) 1-9.

  • 6. Antoniou Κ. Volioti Ch. & Stilianidis P. (2012). Distance learning cooperative activities: In a case study on Information and Communication Technologies in Education. In Ch. Karagiannidis P. Politis & I. Κarasavidis (Eds.) Volos: University of Thessaly.

  • 7. Arvanitis N. (2007). The portfolio as a means of alternative and authentic pedagogical evaluation of the student. Scientific Step 6 168-180.

  • 8. Angelaki C. & Mavroidis I. (2013). Communication and Social Presence: The Impact on Adult Learners’ Emotions in Distance Learning. European Journal of Open Distance and ELearning 16(1) 78-93.

  • 9. Balaban-Sali J. (2008). Designing motivational learning systems in distance education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 9(3) 149-161.

  • 10. Barnard L. Lan W. To Y. Paton V. & Lai S. L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet and Higher Education 12(1) 1-6.

  • 11. Basdogan C. Ho C. H. Srinivasan M. & Slater M. (2000). An experimental study on the role of touch in shared virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 7(4) 443-460.

  • 12. Benson P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language teaching 40(1) 21-40.

  • 13. Berg S. & Chyung S. Y. (2008). Factors that Influence Informal Learning in the Workplace. Journal of workplace learning 20(4) 229-244.

  • 14. Bray E. Aoki K. & Dlugosh L. (2008). Predictors of Learning Satisfaction in Japanese Online Distance Learners. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/525/1154

  • 15. Chartofilaka A-M. (2007). Towards a dynamic teaching tool for Distance Education. Open Education: The Journal for Open and Distance Education and Educational Technology 3(2).

  • 16. Chmiliar L. (2011). Self Regulation skills and the post secondary distance learner. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 318-321.

  • 17. Christophel D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors student motivation and learning. Communication Education 39 323-340.

  • 18. Christophel D. M. & Gorham J. (1995). A test-retest analysis of student motivation teacher immediacy and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education 44 292-306.

  • 19. Creswell J. (2011). The study in Education (1st ed.). (Ch. Tzobartzoudis Ed. & Ν. Κouvarakou Trans.) Athens: Greece.

  • 20. Driver M. (2002). Exploring student perceptions of group interaction and class satisfaction in the web-enhanced classroom. Internet and Higher Education 5(1) 35-45.

  • 21. Falloon G. (2011). Making the Connection: Moore’s Theory of Transactional Distance and Its Relevance to the Use of a Virtual Classroom in Postgraduate Online Teacher Education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 43(3) 187-209.

  • 22. Firat M. (2016). Measuring the e-Learning Autonomy of Distance Education Students. Open Praxis 8(3) 191-201.

  • 23. Fotiadou T. (2001). The portfolio as a tool for developing students’ skills: A proposal. Education Review 5 128-138.

  • 24. Garrison D. R. & Anderson T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st Century: A framework for research and practice. London: Routledge/Falmer.

  • 25. Garrison D. R. Anderson T. & Archer W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2 87-105.

  • 26. Garrison R. & Akyol Z. (2009). Role of instructional technology in the transformation of higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 21(1) 19-31.

  • 27. Garrison R. & Arbaugh B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review issues and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10(3) 157-172.

  • 28. Ghamdi A. Samarji A. & Watt A. (2016). Essential Considerations in Distance Education in KSA: Teacher Immediacy in a Virtual Teaching and Learning Environment. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 6(1) 17-22.

  • 29. Giagli S. Giaglis G. & Κoutsouba M. (2010). Autonomy in learning as it concerns the of distance learning education. Open Education - The Journal for Open and Distance Education and Educational Technology 6(1-2) 90-105.

  • 30. Gillies D. (2008). Student perspectives on videoconferencing in teacher education at a distance. Distance Education 29(1) 107-118.

  • 31. Gilmore J. Vieyra M. Timmerman B. Feldon D. & Maher M. (2015). The relationship between undergraduate research participation and subsequent research performance of early career STEM graduate students. The Journal of Higher Education 86(6) 834-863.

  • 32. Gunawardena C. N. & Zittle F. G. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education 11(3) 8-26.

  • 33. Hartley K. & Bendixen L. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher 30(9) 22-26.

  • 34. Hurd S. Beaven T. & Ortega A. (2001). Developing autonomy in a distance language learning context: issues and dilemmas for course writers. System 29(3) 341-355.

  • 35. Huwe T. K. (2006). Social networking mixes the hip with the proven. Computers in Libraries 26(10) 31-33.

  • 36. Karava Ε. (2014). Developing an online distance training programme for primary EFL teachers in Greece: Entering a brave new world. Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning 5(1) 70-86.

  • 37. Kastanos N. Petropoulos P. & Roussis R. (2004). Design proposal for the design of decentralized distance learning programs for teachers in the teaching of natural sciences. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference of the Association for Natural Science Teaching and 2nd IOSTE in Southern Europe concerning the Teaching Science & Technology: Challenges of the 21st Century. Kalamata.

  • 38. Kear K. (2010). Social presence in online learning communities. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010. Denmark.

  • 39. Keegan D. (1996). Foundations of Distance education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.

  • 40. Keegan D. (2001). Οι Βασικές Αρχές της Ανοικτής και Εξ Αποστάσεως Εκπαίδευσης. (A. Μελίστα Trans.) Αθήνα: Μεταίχμιο.

  • 41. Kim J. Kwon Y. & Cho D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education. Computers & Education 57 1512-1520.

  • 42. Komis B. Zagouras Ch. Eggarchou D. Skountzis G. Goumenakis G. Simotas K. & Fragkaki M. (2014). The conceptual design of the mixed education model for primary school teachers (UE 60-70). In P. Anastasiadis N. aranis B. Oikonomidis & M. Kalogiannakis (Eds.) 9th Pan-Hellenic Conference with International Participation in Information and Communication Technologies in Education (pp. 1025-1032). Rethymnon: University of Crete.

  • 43. Kozan K. (2016). A Comparative Structural Equation Modeling Investigation of the Relationships among Teaching Cognitive and Social Presence. Online Learning Consortium 20(3) 210-227.

  • 44. Kožuh I. Hintermair M. Hauptman S. & Debevc M. (2015). What predicts the frequencies of activities on social networking sites among the D/deaf and hard of hearing. Procedia Computer Science 67 185-192.

  • 45. Kucuk S. & Sahin I. (2013). From the Perspective of Community of Inquiry Framework: An Examination of Facebook Uses by Pre-Service Teachers as a Learning Environment. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET 12(2) 142-156.

  • 46. Lazakidou-Kafetzi G. Paraskeva F. & Retalis S. (2004). By detecting ways of using metacognitionfor to mathematical problems solution. Proceedings of the 4th HSCSE Congress 143-152. Athens.

  • 47. Lee Y. & Choi J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: implications for practice and future research. Education Tech Research 59 593-618. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 48. Li N. Lee K. & Kember D. (2000). Towards self-direction in study methods: The ways in which new students learn to study part-time. Distance Education 21(1) 6-28.

  • 49. Lionarakis A. (2001). Which Distance Learning Education we are talking for? Concerning the records of the 1st Panhellenic Conference for Open and Distance Learning Education. Hellenic Open University of Patra.

  • 50. Lionarakis A. (2004). Towards a theory of Open and Distance Learning Education - the development of complexity. Retrieved from TEI of Larissa: http://elektra.teilar.gr/syncppt/theoryOfTeleeducation.pdf

  • 51. Lionarakis A. (2009) Developing a Methodological Approach (Teaching) of Lifelong Learning Programs from distance. Athens: Institute for Adult Education.

  • 52. Lombard M. & Ditton T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3(2). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x/full

  • 53. Lombard Μ. Ditton Τ. Β. Crane D. & Davis B. (2000). Measuring presence: A literaturebased approach to the development of a standardized paper-and-pencil instrument. Proceedings of the Third international workshop on presence 240 2-4. Netherlands.

  • 54. Masino M. (2015). Integration of blackboard in the online learning environment. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies 16. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1069393.pdf

  • 55. Moore Α. Masterson J. T. Christophel D. M. & Shea K. A. (1996). College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction. Communication Education 45 29-39.

  • 56. Moore M. G. (2016). Thirty Years Later: Self-Directed Learning and Distance Education-In Retrospect. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education 31(2). Retrieved from http://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1000/1656

  • 57. Moore G. M. & Kearsley G. (2005). Distance Education. A Systems View (2nd ed.). Canada: Thomson Wadsworth.

  • 58. Mouzakis C. & Balaouras P. (2009). Real-time Video Services for Continuing Professional Development of the Greek Academic Network’s Technical Staff. In T. Bastiaens (Ed.) Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate Government Healthcare and Higher Education (pp. 1836-1841). Chesapeake: VA: AACE.

  • 59. Mouzakis Ch. Vathis S. & Gogolou A. (2014). Learning experiences through online discussions: Making use of Edmodo in distance education of teachers. Science and Technology Issues in Education 7(1-2) 77-97.

  • 60. Nikolaki E. & Koutsouba M. (2012). Support and promotion of self-regulated learning through the educational material at the Hellenic Open University. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE 13(3) 226-238.

  • 61. Noteboom J. & Claywell L. (2010). Student Perceptions of Cognitive Social and Teaching Presence. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning 1-4.

  • 62. Nowak K. & Biocca F. (2003). The Effect of the Agency and Anthropomorphism on Users’ Sense of Telepresence Copresence and Social Presence in Virtual Environments. Massachusetts Institute of Technology 12(5) 481-494.

  • 63. Ntalakou B. P. (2005). Application of learning through problem solving in distance education: Detection of student’s views on the administrative organization in Greece. In Α. Lionarakis (Ed.) Applications of Pedagogy and Technology. Records Kept of the 3rd International Conference concerning the Open and Distance Education (pp. 317-325). Athens: Forerunner (Propobos).

  • 64. Offir B. Lev Y. & Bezalel R. (2008). Surface and deep learning processes in distance education: Synchronous versus asynchronous systems. Computers & Education 51(3) 1172-1183.

  • 65. Pantis I. (2016). Compulsory laboratory activities of Physical Sciences in High Schools General Lyceums and Vocational High Schools. For the school year 2015-2016. Marousi: Ministry of Education Research and Religious Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.minedu.gov.gr/publications/docs2016/26-01-16_ergastiriakes.pdf

  • 66. Papanikolaou K. Giouli E. & Makri K. (2013). A mixed teacher education framework concerning the teaching of digital technology. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference in Open & Distance Learning 7 243-255. Athens.

  • 67. Papastamatis A. Grivas E. Valkanos E. & Giavrimis P. (2010). Professional development of teachers: Teachers’ needs in Second Chance Schools and suggested training methods. (K. Afoi Ed.) Thessaloniki.

  • 68. Paraskevas A. & Psilos D. (2009). Research of the active participation and interaction of teachers in their distance education cooperation in the context of their training in the area of fluids. Open Education - The Journal for Open and Distance Education and Educational Technology 5(1) 64-76.

  • 69. Paulsen M. F. (1993). The hexagon of cooperative freedom: A distance education theory attuned to computer conferencing. Distance Education Online Symposium 3(2).

  • 70. Peters Ο. (2001). Learning and teaching in distance education: Analyses and interpretations from an international perspective. London: Kogan Page.

  • 71. Peters O. (2010). Distance education in transition: Developments and issues (5th ed.). Oldenburg Germany: BIS-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg. Retrieved from https://www.unioldenburg.de/fileadmin/user_upload/c3l/master/mde/download/asfvolume5_5_ebook.pdf

  • 72. Poellhuber B. Anderson T. & Roy N. (2011). Distance students’ readiness for social media and collaboration. International Review of Research on Distance and Open Learning 12(6) 102-125. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewFile/1018/1992

  • 73. Richardson C. & Swan Κ. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning & satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1) 68-88.

  • 74. Rovai A. P. (2002). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. Internet and Higher Education 5(3) 197-211.

  • 75. Rubin B. Fernandes R. & Avgerinou M. (2011). How the Use of Virtual Learning Environment Tools Affects the Online Learning Experience? Proceedings of the 6th International Conference in Open & Distance Learning 595-601. Loutraki.

  • 76. Schubert T. W. Friedmann F. & Regenbrecht H. T. (1999). Decomposing the sense of presence: Factor analytic insights. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Presence 6-7. University of Essex.

  • 77. Shea P. & Bidjerano T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education 52 543-553.

  • 78. Shearer R. (2007). Instructional Design in Distance Education: An Overview. In M. Moore & W. Anderson (Eds.) Handbook of distance education (pp. 275-286). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Publishers.

  • 79. Shin N. & Chan J. (2004). Direct and indirect effects of online learning on distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology 35(3) 275-288.

  • 80. Sibgatullina A. (2015). Contemporary Technologies to Improve the Quality of Education When Training Teachers. International Education Studies 8(3) 167-174.

  • 81. Simonson M. Smaldino S. & Albri M. (2008). Teaching and Learning at a Distance Foundations of Distance Education (4th ed.).

  • 82. Smith C. (2007). When in Rome: Teaching 21st century students using 21st century tools. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Instructional Technology Conference 3 3-20. Murfreesboro. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496202.pdf#page=3

  • 83. So H.-J. & Brush Τ. (2006). Student perceptions of cooperative learning in a distance learning environment: Relationships with social presence and satisfaction. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 1(1).

  • 84. So Η. & Brush Τ. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning social presence & satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships & critical factors. Computers & Education 51(1) 318-336.

  • 85. Sreebny O. (2007). Digital rendezvous: Social software in higher education. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research 2.

  • 86. Steuer J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication 42(4) 72-93.

  • 87. Sung Ε. & Mayer R. E. (2012). Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Computers in Human Behavior 28(5) 1738-1747.

  • 88. Tam M. (2000). Constructivism Instructional Design and Technology: Implications for Transforming Distance Learning. Educational Technology & Society 3(2) 50-60.

  • 89. Themeli C. & Bougia A. (2016). Tele-proximity: Tele-community of Inquiry Model. Facial Cues for Social Cognitive and Teacher Presence in Distance Education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 17(6) 145-163.

  • 90. Tsiotakis P. & Tzimogiannis A. (2014). The role study of the Structure in the Development of Electronic Learning Communities of Teachers. In P. Anastasiadis N. Zaranis V. Oikonomidis & M. Kalogiannakis (Eds.) 9th PanHellenic Conference with International Participation: Technologies of Information & communication in Education (pp. 309-318). Rethymno: University of Crete.

  • 91. Tsitlakidou E. (2011). The role of the teacher concerning the autonomy in learning for distance education learners. Postgraduate Thesis Open University of Patra Studies in Education Patra.

  • 92. Witmer B. G. & Singer M. J. (1998). Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire. (MIT Ed.) Presence 7(3) 225-240.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1210 515 68
PDF Downloads 525 314 43