You are here:

Optimal Online Learning Environments: An Evaluation of an Internet-based Masters in Educational Technology
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Hawaii, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-58-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of the research was to evaluate an existing online Masters delivered through distributed, distance learning. Through the evaluation, the significance of technology tools, pedagogic strategies, and how they interact in distributed environments was addressed. Data were collected from student surveys, faculty surveys, student interviews, and student portfolios. The Empowerment Evaluation methodology was used to triangulate data collected from multiple stakeholders to lend credence to the conclusions made, which included: technology tools in distributed environments should appeal to multiple learning styles of students; appropriate strategies in distributed environments included: processing content, discussing content, problem-solving through collaboration, reflecting, and building a community of learning; tools and strategies complement each other; face-to-face interaction was significant; and the evaluation revealed the program met goals and objectives.

Citation

Menchaca, M. (2006). Optimal Online Learning Environments: An Evaluation of an Internet-based Masters in Educational Technology. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2006--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 454-458). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 30, 2022 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Belanger, F., & Jordan, D. (2000). Evaluation and implementation of distance learning: Technologies, tools, and techniques. London, UK: Idea Group Publishing.
  2. Blakeslee, G. (1998). WWW.onlinegraduateedtechcourses.Paper presented at National Education Computing Conference, San Diego, CA.
  3. Blumenstyk, G. (1999, June 18). A company pays universities top dollar to use their names and professors. Chronicle of Higher Education.
  4. Dede, C. (1996). The evolution of distance education: Emerging technologies and distributed learning. The American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 4-36.
  5. Dede, C. (1998). Educational Policy. Presentation at 17th annual Florida Educational Technology Conference. Orlando, FL.
  6. Dede, C. (2004). Enabling distributed learning communities via emerging technologies—Part One. THE Journal, 32(2), 12-17.
  7. Dyson, E. (1997). Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age. New York: Broadway Books.
  8. Fetterman, D., Kaftarian, S., & Wandersman, A. (1996) Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment& Accountability. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  9. Fletcher, G. (2004). The future of e-learning. THE Journal, 32(2), 2-3.
  10. Groff, W.H. (1996). Creating and sustaining learning communities in the digital era. Nova Southeastern University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 396 188.
  11. Harasim, L., & Stephen, T. (1996). Computer networking and scholarly communication in the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  12. Harper, B., Hedberg, J., Bennet, S., & Lockyer, L. (2000). The on-line experience: The state of Australian on-line education and training practices review of research. Leabrook, Australia: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.
  13. Johnstone, S. (1997). Quality control in electronic delivery of higher education. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 2(3), 12-17.
  14. Jones, G. (2000). Cyberschools: An education renaissance. Englewood, CO: Cyber Publishing Group.
  15. Marshall, G. (1997). Time for change: Critical issues for teacher educators. In D. Passey & B. Samways (Eds.), Information technology: Supporting change through teacher education (pp. 35-39), London: Chapman and Hall.
  16. Peters, T. (1997). The circle of innovation: You can't shrink your way to greatness. New York: Knopf.
  17. Phipps, R. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
  18. Phipps, R., Wellman, J., & Merisotis, J. (1998). Assuring quality in distance learning: A preliminary review. Washington, DC: Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
  19. Schwitzer, A., Ancis, J., & Brown, N. (2001). Promoting student learning and student development at a distance: Student affairs concepts and practices for televised instruction and other forms of distance learning. Lanham, MD: American College Personnel Association.
  20. Van Dusen, G. (1997). The virtual campus: Technology and reform in higher education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Vol. 25, No. 5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
  21. Watson, D. (1997). Information technology: Policy and practice. In J. Dillon& M. Maguire (Eds.), Becoming a teacher (pp. 199210).

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References