You are here:

Evaluation of Learning Objects From Different Aspects of Effectiveness: Learning, Learning Object Benefit, and Learning Object Quality
PROCEEDINGS

, Erciyes University, Turkey

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in San Diego, CA, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-78-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Learning objects have different and many possibilities to change educational practices; however there is a lack of empirical evidence of the effectiveness and usefulness of LOs. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and report results of three studies under five major headings in terms of the effectiveness and usefulness of learning objects in various educational settings. According to results there was an interaction between effectiveness of LOs and different instructional conditions. Although learning objects can provide suitable structure for constructing learning process (courses), it is acceptable that LOs are not enough alone to get high quality learning performance and to create meaningful learning activities. Nevertheless, LOs are very effective in a well prepared learning environment.

Citation

Arslan, K. (2010). Evaluation of Learning Objects From Different Aspects of Effectiveness: Learning, Learning Object Benefit, and Learning Object Quality. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2010--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2143-2149). San Diego, CA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Agostinho, S., Bennett, S., Lockyear, L., & Harper, B. (2004). Developing a learning object metadata application profile based on LOM suitable for the Australian higher education market. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(2), 191-208.
  2. Allert, H., Richter, C.(2004) lifelong learning and second-order learning objects. British Journal of Educational Technology, Volume 35, No. 6, pp. 701-715
  3. Barker, S., Wintertein, P., Wright, K. (2004). Tools for Creating E-learning: Learning Obects. Human Kinetics-ATT, 9 (1), pp. 10-14
  4. Bennett, J. (2005). Using MERLOT in the Classrom. Human Kinetics-ATT, Volume 10, No. 3, pp. 37-39
  5. Bennett, K., McGee, P. (2005). Transformative Power of the Learning Objects debate. Open Learning. Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 15-30
  6. Caris, M. (2004). Why don't faculty use learning object repositories? Proceedings from The World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Switzerland, 2004(1), 2838-2840.
  7. Harden, M.R. (2005). A new vision for distance learnig and continuibg medical education. The journel of Continuing Education in the Healthy Professions, Volume 25, pp. 43-51
  8. Hodges, C.B. (2004). Designing to Motivate: Motivational Techniques to Incorporate in E-Learning Experiences. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 2(3).
  9. Hodgins, W. (2002). The Future of Learning Objects. In D. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communication and Technology.
  10. IEEE Learning and Technology Standards Committee (2002) http://Itsc.ieee.org.
  11. Fitzgerald, M., Lovin, V., & Branch, R. (2003). The gateway to educational materials: An evaluation of an online resource for teachers and an exploration of user behavior. Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 11(1), 21-51.
  12. Kay, R.H. (2006). Addressing gender differences in computer ability, attitudes, and use: The laptop effect. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(2), 187-211.
  13. Kay, R.H. & Knaack, L. (2007). Evaluating the use of learning objects for secondary school science. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(4), 261-289.
  14. Koppi, T., Bogle. L., Bogle. M.(2005) Learning Objects, repositories, shairing and reusability. Open Learning, Volume 20, No. 1, pp. 83-91
  15. Kozma, R.B. (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change. A globalperspective. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  16. Koper, R. (2003) Combining reusable learning resources and services with pedagogical purposeful units of learnin. Reusing online resources: a sustainable approach to e-learning. London
  17. Kulik, J.A. (1994). Meta-analytic Studies of Findings on Computer-Based Instruction. In E.L.
  18. Longmire, W. (2000). Apimer on Learning Objects.
  19. Merrill, D. (2002). Knowledge Objects and Mental Model. In D.A. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Find.
  20. Metros, E.S. (2005). Visualizing knowledge in new educational environments: a course on learning objects. Open learning, volume 20, no. 1, pp. 93-102
  21. Milstead, J., & Feldman, S. (1999). Metadata: Cataloging by Any Other Retrieved Jan. 25, 2002, from http://www.onlineine.com/onlinemag/OL1999/milsteadl.html
  22. Morteo, G. (2005). Computer Support for learning mathematics: a learning environment based on recreational learning objects. Californina. Computers and Education.
  23. Oakes, K. (2002). E-learning. An objective View of Learning Objects.Parrish, Patrich, H. (2004). The trouble with learnig objects. Educational technology research and Development, 52 (1), pp. 49-67.
  24. Podell, D.M. (1992) Improving academic achievement in reading of the at-risk first grader through the use of computers. Unpublished master's thesis, University of North Florida, Jacksonvilla, Florida
  25. Robinson, R., & Anderson, M. (2002). The Ever-changing Courseware Landscape: Migration Strategies and Lessons Learned. Paper presented at the Distance Learning 2002, TX.
  26. Shank, D.J.(2005) The Emergence of Learning Objects: the reference librarian's role. Research strategies, Volume 19, pp. 193-203
  27. Schibeci, R., Lake, D., Phillips, R., Lowe, K., Cummings, R., Miller, E. (2006). Evaluating the use of the learning objects in Australian and New Zealand schools. Computer and Education, 50 (2008), pp 271-283.
  28. Weller, M. (2004). Learning objects and e-learning cost dilemma. Open Learning. Volume 19, No. 3.
  29. Wiley, D. (2000). Learning Object Design and Sequencing Theory. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
  30. Wiley, D. (2001). Learning Objects Need Instructional Design Theory. In A. Rossett (Ed.), The 2001/2002 ASTD Distance Learning Yearbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  31. Wiley, D. (2002). Connecting Learning Objects to Instructional Design Theory: A Definition, a Metaphor, and a Taxonomy. In D. Wiley (Ed.), The Instructional Use of Learning Objects (pp. 1-58). Bloomington, IN:
  32. Voorbij, H. (1999). Searching scientific information on the Internet: A dutch academic user survey. Journal of American Society for Information Science, 50(7), 598-615.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts