Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

THE EFFECT OF LEARNING ACTIVITIES ORGANIZED IN DIFFERENT LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS ON LEARNERS' SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS, LEARNING, AND SATISFACTION LEVELS

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 26, 78 - 96, 28.10.2023

Şener Balat , Selçuk Karaman

https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1295109

Öz

This study aims to examine the impact of learning activities organized in different learning environments on learners' levels of social presence, learning, and satisfaction. An experimental study was conducted on two separate groups using a widely used learning management system and a social networking platform during a six-week implementation period, employing various learning activities such as educational videos, true-false matching, question-answer, chat, and discussion. The research sample consists of 64 students enrolled in an undergraduate program at a state university. Two different learning environments were designed for the experimental procedure. This study collected data related to three variables: social presence perception, achievement status, and satisfaction level. The "social presence scale" was used to measure social presence perception, the "satisfaction scale" was used to measure satisfaction level, and the "academic achievement test" was used to determine the level of learning. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistical tools, t-test, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) methods. According to the research findings, learning management systems and social networking platforms generally do not differ in terms of learners' perception of social participation, satisfaction level, and academic achievement level. While differentiation in favor of the learning management system was observed in terms of satisfaction level on an item basis, differentiation was found in terms of communication and interaction with group peers in the social networking environment. Furthermore, a positive relationship was found between students' academic achievements and their perception of social participation in the learning management system environment. In contrast, no relationship was observed in the social networking environment. Therefore, implementing similar activities in different environments does not lead to differences in perception of social participation, satisfaction, and achievement. However, differences may arise among these variables depending on the characteristics of the environments. Hence, it is important to combine the strengths of the environments to facilitate positive interaction among these variables. In this way, the strengths of the environments should be integrated to foster a positive interaction among these variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning Management System Social Media Platform Social Presence Satisfaction Achievement Interaction

Kaynakça

  • Antheunis, M.L., Schouten, A.P., & Krahmer, E.J. (2016). The Role of Social Networking Sites in Early Adolescents’ Social Lives. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36, 348 - 371.
  • Bardakcı, S. (2010). Çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamında algılanan sosyalleşme ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 43(1).
  • Bilgin, H. (2013). Students’ CALLing: Blended language learning for students. Blended learning in English language teaching: Course design and implementation, 207.
  • Coates, H., James, R. and Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning, Tertiary Education and Management, 19-36.
  • Cochrane, T., and Bateman, R. (2010). Smartphones give you wings: Pedagogical affordances of mobile Web 2,0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 1-14.
  • Çalışkan, H. (2007). Çevrim-içi (Online) eğitimde öğrenen etkileşimi. çevrim-içi. http://aof20.anadolu.edu.tr/bildiriler/Hasan_ Caliskan.doc, 12 Haziran 2012’de alınmıştır.
  • Deng, L. And Tavares, J.T. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students’ motivation and experiences in online communities. Computers & Education 68 (2013) 167–176
  • Doğan, D. , Duman, D. ve Seferoğlu, S.Sadi (2011, Şubat). E-öğrenme ortamlarında toplumsal buradalığın arttırılması için kullanılabilecek iletişim araçları. Akademik Bilişim 2011, 2-4 Şubat 2011 / İnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya.
  • Duran, N., Önal, A., ve Kurtuluş, C. (2006, Şubat). E-öğrenme ve kurumsal eğitimde yeni yaklaşım öğrenim yönetim sistemleri. Akademik Bilişim Konferansları 2006, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Denizli.
  • Džunić, M. Ž., & Stoimenov, L. (2011). Elearning Scenario in Community of Practice Environment. E-Society Journal, 2(1).
  • Feniger, Y. (2020). Evidence-based decision making or a tunnel vision effect? TIMSS, problem definition and policy change in Israeli mathematics education. Critical Studies in Education, 61, 363 - 379.
  • Garrison, D. R. (1999). Will distance disappear in distance education? A reaction. Journal of Distance Education.
  • Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American journal of distance education, 11(3), 8-26.
  • Gülbahar, Y., Kalelioğlu, F. ve Madran, R. O. (2010). Sosyal Ağların Eğitim Amaçlı Kullanımı. Türkiye‟de İnternet Konferansı inet-tr. 2010. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Hasançebi, F., Yavuz, M., Kayali, B., Hasançebi, M., Tutal, Ö., & Özkılıç, A. (2022). Students’ Views Regarding Instruction during the Pandemic Process. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 7(1), 51-63.
  • Heba EL-Deghaidy, H., Nouby, A., Effectiveness of a Blended E-Learning Cooperative Approach in An Egyptian Teacher Education Programme. Computers & Education 51 (2008) 988–1006.
  • Holmberg, B. (1995). Theory and practice of distance education (2nd Edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Hussin, A.H., Yaakob, H., & Abedin, N.F. (2016). The Relationship between Accessibility, Communication and Motivation towards Online Learining. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering, 8, 103-107.
  • Karaman, S., Özen, Ü., Yıldırım, S., & Kaban, A. (2009). Açık kaynak kodlu öğretim yönetim sistemi üzerinden internet destekli (harmanlanmış) öğrenim deneyimi. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı, 11, 13.
  • Kern, D. and Baldissera (2012). Moodle or Facebook? An Experience with Moodle UFRGS LMS in the Teachingof Art History, Theory and Criticism at Graduate Level, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
  • Kern, D. and Baldissera (2012). Moodle or Facebook? An Experience with Moodle UFRGS LMS in the Teachingof Art History, Theory and Criticism at Graduate Level, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
  • Kip, B. ve Aydın, C. H. (2008). Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamlarında Sosyal Bulunusluk Algısı. 8. Uluslararası Eğitim Teknolojileri Konferansı. Eskisehir.
  • Kožuh, I., Jeremic, Z., Sarjaš, A., Bele, J.L., Devedzic, V., & Debevc, M. (2015). Social Presence and Interaction in Learning Environments: The Effect on Student Success. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 18, 223-236.
  • Leafman, J.S., Mathieson, K.M., & Ewing, H.L. (2013). Student Perceptions of Social Presence and Attitudes toward Social Media: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study. The International Journal of Higher Education, 2, 67-77.
  • Lee, Y., & Pillai, V. (2022). The Impact of Online Learning on 7th Grade Students’ Perception of Engagement, Social Presence, and Satisfaction During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Student Research, 11(3).
  • Lowenthal, P.R., & Snelson, C. (2017). In search of a better understanding of social presence: an investigation into how researchers define social presence. Distance Education, 38, 141 - 159.
  • Machado, M and Tao, E. (2007). Blackboard vs. Moodle: Comparing User Experience of Learning Management Systems, 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S4J-12
  • Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. R., & Smith, E. R. (2007). Situating social influence processes: Dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Personality and social psychology review, 11(3), 279-300.
  • McGill, T.J. , Klobas, J. E. (2008). A task–technology fit view of learning management system impact. Computers & Education 52 (2009) 496–508.
  • McLellan, H. (1999). Online Education as Interactive Experience: Some Guiding Models. Educational Technology , 36-42.
  • Miao, J., & Ma, L. (2022). Students' online interaction, self-regulation, and learning engagement in higher education: The importance of social presence to online learning. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 815220. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.815220
  • Moore, M. and Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: a systems view. Belmont: CA: Wadsworth.
  • Mulyati, S., Arief, M., & Rasto (2021). Student Learning Motivation: Perceptions of Teaching Methods and Learning Media. Proceedings of the Conference on International Issues in Business and Economics Research (CIIBER 2019).
  • Narenjithani, F., Keramati, M., & Hosseinisohi, M. (2022). The role of self-directed learning in the effectiveness of e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ), 16(3), 571-589.
  • Nestor, P. G., & Schutt, R. K. (2018). Research methods in psychology: Investigating human behavior. Sage Publications.
  • Netanda, R. S. (2020). Supporting Learning through Learning Management Systems in an ODL Environment amid Covid-19: Technology Accessibility and Student Success.
  • Ng, E. M. (2009). An alternative learning platform to facilitate usability and synchronization of learning resources. In Encyclopedia of information communication technology (pp. 21-31). IGI Global.
  • Nguyen, H. T. T. (2021). Boosting Motivation to Help Students to Overcome Online Learning Barriers in Covid-19 Pandemic: A Case Study. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(10).
  • Noesgaard, S. S., & Ørngreen, R. (2015). The effectiveness of e-learning: an explorative and integrative review of the definitions, methodologies and factors that promote e-learning effectiveness. Electronic Journal of E-learning, 13(4), 278-290.
  • Paulsen, M.F. (2011). Online Education Systems: Discussion and Definition of Terms. NKI Distance Education, http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten 21.07.2011 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
  • Petrovic, N., Jeremic, V., Cirovic, M., Radojicic, Z., & Milenkovic, N. (2014). Facebook versus Moodle in practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(2), 117-125.
  • Petrovic, N., Jeremic, V., Cirovic, M., Radojicic, Z., & Milenkovic, N. (2014). Facebook versus Moodle in practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(2), 117-125.
  • Popescu, M. M. (2016). Media psychology in elearning experiences–why communication matters. In Conference proceedings of eLearning and Software for Education eLSE Vol. 12, No. 02, pp. 194-199.
  • Razeeth, M., Kariapper, R., Pirapuraj, P., Nafrees, A.C., Rishan, U.M., & Ali, S.N. (2019). E-learning at home vs traditional learning among higher education students: a survey based analysis.
  • Salimon, M.G., Sanuri, S., Aliyu, O.A., Perumal, S., & Yusr, M.M. (2021). E-learning satisfaction and retention: a concurrent perspective of cognitive absorption, perceived social presence and technology acceptance model. J. Syst. Inf. Technol., 23, 109-129.
  • Scheepers, L., & van den Berg, G. (2023). Targeted and Tailored: The Importance of a Personalized Approach to Open Distance Learning Support. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue internationale du e-learning et la formation à distance.
  • Shah, J. N. (2015). How to write ‘method’in scientific journal article. Journal of Patan Academy of Health Sciences, 2(2), 1-2.
  • Şahinoğlu, E. (2012). Moodle ders yönetimi bilgi sistemi destekli matematik öğretiminin, öğrencilerin matematik başarısına ve matematik dersine yönelik tutumlarına etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eğitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Eğitim Teknolojisi Bilim Dalı, Ankara.
  • Tiryakioğlu, F. ve Erzurum, F. (2011). Bir eğitim aracı olarak ağların kullanımı, 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications 27-29 April, 2011 Antalya-Turkey
  • Tu, C. H. (2000). Strategies to Increase Interaction in Online Social Learning Environments. In SITE 2000. Norfolk: Va.: AACE.
  • Woerner, J. S. (2015). A qualitative case study of Facebook and its perceived impact on social connectivity (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).
  • Yamamoto G.T., Demiray, U. ve Kesim,M. (2010). Türkiye‟de E-öğrenme: Gelişmeler ve Uygulamalar. Ankara: Cem Web Ofset.
  • Yavuz, M., Kayalı, B., Balat, Ş., & Karaman, S. (2020). Salgin Sürecinde Türkiye’deki Yükseköğretim Kurumlarinin Acil Uzaktan Öğretim Uygulamalarinin İncelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 49(1), 129-154.
  • Young, S., and Delves, L. (2009). Expanding to fit the (blog) space: Enhancing social work education through online Technologies. Çevrim-içi: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckl and09/procs/young.pdf, 12.06.2012 tarihinde erişildi.
  • Yuen, S. C. Y., & Yuen, P. (2008). Social networks in education. In E-learn: World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 1408-1412). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Zamani, N.D., Mohamad Khalid, R., Shamala, P., Abdl Aziz, N., Othman, D., & Whanchit, W. (2022). Exploring Learning Environment in Online Learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences.

FARKLI ÖĞRENME ORTAMLARINDA DÜZENLENEN ÖĞRENME ETKİNLİKLERİNİN ÖĞRENENLERİN SOSYAL BULUNUŞLUK, ÖĞRENME VE MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYLERİNE ETKİSİ

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 26, 78 - 96, 28.10.2023

Şener Balat , Selçuk Karaman

https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1295109

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı öğrenme ortamlarında düzenlenen öğrenme etkinliklerinin öğrenenlerin sosyal bulunuşluk, öğrenme ve memnuniyet düzeylerine etkisini incelemektir. Eğitsel videolar, doğru-yanlış eşleştirme, soru-cevap, sohbet ve tartışma gibi çeşitli öğrenme etkinlikleri kullanılarak altı haftalık bir uygulama süreci boyunca yaygın olarak kullanılan bir öğrenme yönetim sistemi ve sosyal paylaşım ortamını kullanan iki ayrı grup üzerinde deneysel çalışma yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini, bir devlet üniversitesinin lisans programına kayıtlı 64 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Deneysel işlem için iki farklı öğrenme ortamı tasarlanmıştır. Bu çalışmada, sosyal bulunuşluk algısı, başarı durumu ve memnuniyet seviyesi olmak üzere üç değişken ile ilgili veriler toplanmıştır. Sosyal bulunuşluk algısını ölçmek için "sosyal bulunuşluk ölçeği", memnuniyet seviyesini ölçmek için "memnuniyet ölçeği" ve öğrenme düzeyini belirlemek için "akademik başarı testi" kullanılmıştır. Toplanan veriler, betimsel istatistik araçları, t-testi ve kovaryans analizi (ANCOVA) yöntemleriyle analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, öğrenme yönetim sistemi ve sosyal paylaşım ortamları öğrenenlerin sosyal katılım algısı, memnuniyet düzeyi ve akademik başarı düzeyi açısından genel olarak farklılık göstermemektedir. Madde bazında öğrenme yönetim sistemi lehine memnuniyet düzeyinde farklılaşma gözlemlenirken, sosyal paylaşım ortamında grup arkadaşlarıyla iletişim ve etkileşim açısından bir farklılaşma bulunmaktadır. Ayrıca, öğrenme yönetim sistemi ortamında öğrencilerin akademik başarıları ile sosyal katılım algısı arasında pozitif bir ilişki bulunurken, sosyal paylaşım ortamında herhangi bir ilişki gözlemlenmemiştir. Bu nedenle, benzer etkinliklerin farklı ortamlarda uygulanması, sosyal katılım algısı, memnuniyet düzeyi ve başarı seviyelerinde farklılıklara yol açmamaktadır. Ancak, ortamların özelliklerine bağlı olarak bu değişkenler arasında farklılıklar oluşabilir. Bu nedenle, ortamların güçlü yönlerinin birleştirilmesiyle bu değişkenler arasında olumlu etkileşim sağlanması önemlidir. Bu şekilde, bu değişkenler arasında olumlu bir etkileşim sağlamak için ortamların güçlü yönleri birleştirilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğrenme Yönetim Sistemi Sosyal Medya Platformu Sosyal Bulunuşluk Memnuniyet Başarı Etkileşim

Kaynakça

  • Antheunis, M.L., Schouten, A.P., & Krahmer, E.J. (2016). The Role of Social Networking Sites in Early Adolescents’ Social Lives. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36, 348 - 371.
  • Bardakcı, S. (2010). Çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamında algılanan sosyalleşme ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 43(1).
  • Bilgin, H. (2013). Students’ CALLing: Blended language learning for students. Blended learning in English language teaching: Course design and implementation, 207.
  • Coates, H., James, R. and Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning, Tertiary Education and Management, 19-36.
  • Cochrane, T., and Bateman, R. (2010). Smartphones give you wings: Pedagogical affordances of mobile Web 2,0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 1-14.
  • Çalışkan, H. (2007). Çevrim-içi (Online) eğitimde öğrenen etkileşimi. çevrim-içi. http://aof20.anadolu.edu.tr/bildiriler/Hasan_ Caliskan.doc, 12 Haziran 2012’de alınmıştır.
  • Deng, L. And Tavares, J.T. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students’ motivation and experiences in online communities. Computers & Education 68 (2013) 167–176
  • Doğan, D. , Duman, D. ve Seferoğlu, S.Sadi (2011, Şubat). E-öğrenme ortamlarında toplumsal buradalığın arttırılması için kullanılabilecek iletişim araçları. Akademik Bilişim 2011, 2-4 Şubat 2011 / İnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya.
  • Duran, N., Önal, A., ve Kurtuluş, C. (2006, Şubat). E-öğrenme ve kurumsal eğitimde yeni yaklaşım öğrenim yönetim sistemleri. Akademik Bilişim Konferansları 2006, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Denizli.
  • Džunić, M. Ž., & Stoimenov, L. (2011). Elearning Scenario in Community of Practice Environment. E-Society Journal, 2(1).
  • Feniger, Y. (2020). Evidence-based decision making or a tunnel vision effect? TIMSS, problem definition and policy change in Israeli mathematics education. Critical Studies in Education, 61, 363 - 379.
  • Garrison, D. R. (1999). Will distance disappear in distance education? A reaction. Journal of Distance Education.
  • Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American journal of distance education, 11(3), 8-26.
  • Gülbahar, Y., Kalelioğlu, F. ve Madran, R. O. (2010). Sosyal Ağların Eğitim Amaçlı Kullanımı. Türkiye‟de İnternet Konferansı inet-tr. 2010. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
  • Hasançebi, F., Yavuz, M., Kayali, B., Hasançebi, M., Tutal, Ö., & Özkılıç, A. (2022). Students’ Views Regarding Instruction during the Pandemic Process. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 7(1), 51-63.
  • Heba EL-Deghaidy, H., Nouby, A., Effectiveness of a Blended E-Learning Cooperative Approach in An Egyptian Teacher Education Programme. Computers & Education 51 (2008) 988–1006.
  • Holmberg, B. (1995). Theory and practice of distance education (2nd Edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Hussin, A.H., Yaakob, H., & Abedin, N.F. (2016). The Relationship between Accessibility, Communication and Motivation towards Online Learining. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering, 8, 103-107.
  • Karaman, S., Özen, Ü., Yıldırım, S., & Kaban, A. (2009). Açık kaynak kodlu öğretim yönetim sistemi üzerinden internet destekli (harmanlanmış) öğrenim deneyimi. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı, 11, 13.
  • Kern, D. and Baldissera (2012). Moodle or Facebook? An Experience with Moodle UFRGS LMS in the Teachingof Art History, Theory and Criticism at Graduate Level, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
  • Kern, D. and Baldissera (2012). Moodle or Facebook? An Experience with Moodle UFRGS LMS in the Teachingof Art History, Theory and Criticism at Graduate Level, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
  • Kip, B. ve Aydın, C. H. (2008). Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamlarında Sosyal Bulunusluk Algısı. 8. Uluslararası Eğitim Teknolojileri Konferansı. Eskisehir.
  • Kožuh, I., Jeremic, Z., Sarjaš, A., Bele, J.L., Devedzic, V., & Debevc, M. (2015). Social Presence and Interaction in Learning Environments: The Effect on Student Success. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 18, 223-236.
  • Leafman, J.S., Mathieson, K.M., & Ewing, H.L. (2013). Student Perceptions of Social Presence and Attitudes toward Social Media: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study. The International Journal of Higher Education, 2, 67-77.
  • Lee, Y., & Pillai, V. (2022). The Impact of Online Learning on 7th Grade Students’ Perception of Engagement, Social Presence, and Satisfaction During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Student Research, 11(3).
  • Lowenthal, P.R., & Snelson, C. (2017). In search of a better understanding of social presence: an investigation into how researchers define social presence. Distance Education, 38, 141 - 159.
  • Machado, M and Tao, E. (2007). Blackboard vs. Moodle: Comparing User Experience of Learning Management Systems, 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference S4J-12
  • Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. R., & Smith, E. R. (2007). Situating social influence processes: Dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Personality and social psychology review, 11(3), 279-300.
  • McGill, T.J. , Klobas, J. E. (2008). A task–technology fit view of learning management system impact. Computers & Education 52 (2009) 496–508.
  • McLellan, H. (1999). Online Education as Interactive Experience: Some Guiding Models. Educational Technology , 36-42.
  • Miao, J., & Ma, L. (2022). Students' online interaction, self-regulation, and learning engagement in higher education: The importance of social presence to online learning. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 815220. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.815220
  • Moore, M. and Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: a systems view. Belmont: CA: Wadsworth.
  • Mulyati, S., Arief, M., & Rasto (2021). Student Learning Motivation: Perceptions of Teaching Methods and Learning Media. Proceedings of the Conference on International Issues in Business and Economics Research (CIIBER 2019).
  • Narenjithani, F., Keramati, M., & Hosseinisohi, M. (2022). The role of self-directed learning in the effectiveness of e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ), 16(3), 571-589.
  • Nestor, P. G., & Schutt, R. K. (2018). Research methods in psychology: Investigating human behavior. Sage Publications.
  • Netanda, R. S. (2020). Supporting Learning through Learning Management Systems in an ODL Environment amid Covid-19: Technology Accessibility and Student Success.
  • Ng, E. M. (2009). An alternative learning platform to facilitate usability and synchronization of learning resources. In Encyclopedia of information communication technology (pp. 21-31). IGI Global.
  • Nguyen, H. T. T. (2021). Boosting Motivation to Help Students to Overcome Online Learning Barriers in Covid-19 Pandemic: A Case Study. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(10).
  • Noesgaard, S. S., & Ørngreen, R. (2015). The effectiveness of e-learning: an explorative and integrative review of the definitions, methodologies and factors that promote e-learning effectiveness. Electronic Journal of E-learning, 13(4), 278-290.
  • Paulsen, M.F. (2011). Online Education Systems: Discussion and Definition of Terms. NKI Distance Education, http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten 21.07.2011 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
  • Petrovic, N., Jeremic, V., Cirovic, M., Radojicic, Z., & Milenkovic, N. (2014). Facebook versus Moodle in practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(2), 117-125.
  • Petrovic, N., Jeremic, V., Cirovic, M., Radojicic, Z., & Milenkovic, N. (2014). Facebook versus Moodle in practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(2), 117-125.
  • Popescu, M. M. (2016). Media psychology in elearning experiences–why communication matters. In Conference proceedings of eLearning and Software for Education eLSE Vol. 12, No. 02, pp. 194-199.
  • Razeeth, M., Kariapper, R., Pirapuraj, P., Nafrees, A.C., Rishan, U.M., & Ali, S.N. (2019). E-learning at home vs traditional learning among higher education students: a survey based analysis.
  • Salimon, M.G., Sanuri, S., Aliyu, O.A., Perumal, S., & Yusr, M.M. (2021). E-learning satisfaction and retention: a concurrent perspective of cognitive absorption, perceived social presence and technology acceptance model. J. Syst. Inf. Technol., 23, 109-129.
  • Scheepers, L., & van den Berg, G. (2023). Targeted and Tailored: The Importance of a Personalized Approach to Open Distance Learning Support. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue internationale du e-learning et la formation à distance.
  • Shah, J. N. (2015). How to write ‘method’in scientific journal article. Journal of Patan Academy of Health Sciences, 2(2), 1-2.
  • Şahinoğlu, E. (2012). Moodle ders yönetimi bilgi sistemi destekli matematik öğretiminin, öğrencilerin matematik başarısına ve matematik dersine yönelik tutumlarına etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eğitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Eğitim Teknolojisi Bilim Dalı, Ankara.
  • Tiryakioğlu, F. ve Erzurum, F. (2011). Bir eğitim aracı olarak ağların kullanımı, 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications 27-29 April, 2011 Antalya-Turkey
  • Tu, C. H. (2000). Strategies to Increase Interaction in Online Social Learning Environments. In SITE 2000. Norfolk: Va.: AACE.
  • Woerner, J. S. (2015). A qualitative case study of Facebook and its perceived impact on social connectivity (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).
  • Yamamoto G.T., Demiray, U. ve Kesim,M. (2010). Türkiye‟de E-öğrenme: Gelişmeler ve Uygulamalar. Ankara: Cem Web Ofset.
  • Yavuz, M., Kayalı, B., Balat, Ş., & Karaman, S. (2020). Salgin Sürecinde Türkiye’deki Yükseköğretim Kurumlarinin Acil Uzaktan Öğretim Uygulamalarinin İncelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 49(1), 129-154.
  • Young, S., and Delves, L. (2009). Expanding to fit the (blog) space: Enhancing social work education through online Technologies. Çevrim-içi: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckl and09/procs/young.pdf, 12.06.2012 tarihinde erişildi.
  • Yuen, S. C. Y., & Yuen, P. (2008). Social networks in education. In E-learn: World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 1408-1412). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  • Zamani, N.D., Mohamad Khalid, R., Shamala, P., Abdl Aziz, N., Othman, D., & Whanchit, W. (2022). Exploring Learning Environment in Online Learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences.
Toplam 56 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Eğitim Üzerine Çalışmalar (Diğer)
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Şener Balat 0000-0002-9683-1778

Selçuk Karaman 0000-0002-0493-3444

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 27 Ekim 2023
Yayımlanma Tarihi 28 Ekim 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023Sayı: 26

Kaynak Göster

APA Balat, Ş., & Karaman, S. (2023). FARKLI ÖĞRENME ORTAMLARINDA DÜZENLENEN ÖĞRENME ETKİNLİKLERİNİN ÖĞRENENLERİN SOSYAL BULUNUŞLUK, ÖĞRENME VE MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYLERİNE ETKİSİ. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(26), 78-96. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1295109
 Kapak Resmi İndir
Creative Commons Lisansı