JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
The Influence of Students' Perception of Tutor's roles on Deep Learning, Achievement, and Course Evaluation in Online Gifted Education Program
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
The Influence of Students' Perception of Tutor's roles on Deep Learning, Achievement, and Course Evaluation in Online Gifted Education Program
Choi, Kyoungae; Lee, Sunghye;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
This study investigated the relationships among middle school students' perceptions on the roles of online tutor, their deep learning, achievement, and overall evaluation of learning experiences in the context of inquiry based online gifted mathematics and science learning. For this purpose, 249 middle school students who took online course were surveyed about their perceptions on the degree to which their tutor performed the roles as an online tutor. The students were also asked about the activities which indicate deep learning approaches and overall course experiences such as the level of satisfaction, understanding and engagement in the course. The regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationships of students' perceptions on the roles of online tutor, deep learning, achievement, and overall course experiences. The results first showed that the roles of online tutor which affects students' deep learning approach such as high-order learning, integrative learning, reflective learning were the role as a subject matter and evaluation expert. Among the sub variables of deep learning approach the variable that was related to students' overall achievement was the use of high-order learning strategy. Second, the achievement in inquiry task was related to the role of tutor as a guide of learning process and method. Third, students' overall course evaluations such as the level of satisfaction, understanding and engagement were not related to any role of tutor.
 Keywords
Online Gifted Education;Online Inquiry-based Learning;Role of Tutor;Deep Learning;Achievement;Course Evaluation;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
강명희, 이주진, 한정선, 이정민 (2010). 온라인 토론 학습에서 인식된 튜터의 역할, 사회적실재감, 학습결과 간의 관계 규명. 평생교육.HRD연구, 6(4).

2.
강숙희, 조석희, 금미라 (2000). 사이버 영재교육의 가능성 탐구를 위한 사례 연구. 교육정보방송연구, 6(1), 49-70.

3.
강영환 (2004). e-Learning 환경에서 학습자의 만족도와 학습성취도에 영향을 미치는 변인분석 -학습자 특성, 전달전략, 교수자특성을 중심으로-. 석사학위논문. 세종대학교대학원.

4.
강이철, 신재한 (2008). 초등학교 사이버가정학습에서 튜터 역할의 측정도구 개발. 교육공학연구, 24(2), 207-232.

5.
구교정 (2005). 성인 원격교육 효과성에 영향을 미치는 요인 분석 연구 -교원 정보화 원격교육을 중심으로-. 박사학위논문. 홍익대학교 대학원

6.
권성연 (2011a). 온라인 수업에서 교수실재감, 학습접근 만족도 및 학습효과 인식간의 관계분석. 교육공학연구, 27(3), 535-560.

7.
권성연 (2011b) 온라인학습에서 사회적 실재감과 학습자 특성, 토론효과 및 학습효과 인식, 만족도와의 관계 연구. 교육과학연구 42(3), 55-82.

8.
김나연. (2011). 사이버 대학생의 교수실재감, 학습실재감, 학습성과의 구조적 관계 규명. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 석사학위 논문.

9.
김수진, 강희경 (2014). 문제중심학습에서 학습자가 평가한 튜터 역할이 문제중심학습 만족도에 미치는 영향. 한국산학기술학회논문지, 15(8), 4942-4949.

10.
김종렬 (2014). 내재적 동기, 학습전략, 수업참여 및 학업성취도의 구조적 관계: 고등학생의 성별에 따른 차이를 중심으로. 아시아교육연구, 15(1), 93-113.

11.
박상훈 (2000). 웹기반 수업에서 튜터의 동기유발전략이 학습동기에 미치는 영향 -관련성 중심의 개별 메시지를 사용하여-. 석사학위논문 한양대학교 대학원.

12.
박은영 (2007). 영재들의 지식공유와 상호작용 촉진을 위한 구성주의적 e-Mentoring 시스템의 조건 분석 및 설계. 중등교육연구, 55(2), 81-111.

13.
신영희 (2005). 중학교 과학수학 영재학생과 일반학생의 학업적 자기 조절 동기 유형과 실패내성 및 자아존중감과의 관계. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 석사학위 논문.

14.
심희아, 송해덕 (2011). 문제중심학습에서 튜터의 인지적 역할 유형에 따른 발문제공이 문제해결과 만족도에 미치는 효과. 교육공학연구, 27(4), 701-722.

15.
양윤선 (2004). 기업 e-Learning에서 튜터의 학습동기 유발전략에 따른 상호작용 및 학습결과 분석에 대한 연구. 석사학위논문. 숙명여자대학교 원격교육공학대학원.

16.
이미순, 류가애 (2011). 초등 영재 및 일반 학생의 상대적 자율성에 대한 학습동기 연속체관점. 초등교육연구, 24(1), 155-173.

17.
이선임 (1999). 웹 기반 훈련에서 학업 성취에 영향을 미치는 요인 연구 -S사의 사내교육과정을 중심으로-. 석사학위논문. 이화여자대학교 대학원.

18.
이신동, 이정규, 박춘성(2009). 최신영재교육학개론. 학지사.

19.
이성혜 (2014). 대학생이 지각하는 Merrill의 제1교수원리가 수업에 적용된 정도가 학습자의 인지적 참여에 미치는 영향. 교육공학연구, 30(1), 77-103.

20.
이재호 (2002). 과학영재를 위한 전자교재 개발현황 및 활용방안. 한국영재학회 추계학술대회발표논문집. 71-97.

21.
이재호 (2006). 과학영재를 위한 e-Learning 콘텐츠의 설계 방법론. 경인교육대학교 과학교육논총, 19, 125-133.

22.
임병노 (2005). 토론기반의 온라인학습환경에서 교수자 역할과 운영전략. 교육발전연구, 21(1). 79-100.

23.
임정훈 (1998). 인터넷을 활용한 가상수업에서의 교수 -학습 활동 및 교육 효과 연구: 한국방송대학교 인터넷 가상수업 교과목 "고전시가강독" 사례를 중심으로. 교육공학연구, 14(2), 103-136,

24.
임정훈 (1999). 웹 기반 문제해결학습 환경에서 소집단 협동학습전략이 온라인토론의 참여도와 문제해결에 미치는 효과. 박사학위논문. 서울대학교.

25.
장정아 (2005). 웹기반 PBL에서 튜터의 역할수행에 대한 사례연구. 교육공학연구, 21(3), 97-129.

26.
전명남 (2004). Kolb-McCarthy 학습유형에 따른 심층학습의 차이. 교육심리연구, 18(4), 279-292.

27.
정영숙, 최효선 (2008). 적극적/소극적 튜터 간 온라인학습자 지원 유형과 교육적 효과성 비교. 교육공학연구, 24(2). 181-205.

28.
조은순, 유평준, 양윤선 (2004). 기업 e-Learning에서 튜터의 학습동기유발 차별화 전략에 따른 학습자의 상호작용 및 학습결과 분석. 교육공학연구, 20(4), 215-239.

29.
주영주, 김지연 (2003). e-Learning 환경에서 교수-학습지원체제로서 튜터의 역할 및 역량에 관한 탐색. 교육과학연구, 34(1), 19-39.

30.
최지은 (2004). 웹 기반 간호 교육을 위한 튜터의 운영 전략 개발 및 효과 검증 연구. 박사학위논문. 한양대학교 대학원.

31.
하대현 (2005). 대학생과 성인영재간의 동기 요인 구조 및 동기와 창의성간의 관계 유형 비교. 사회교육과학연구, 8(1), 31-62.

32.
한기순, 신정아 (2007). 성취영재와 미성취영재는 어떻게 다른가: 학습전략, 동기, 능력신념, 그리고 문제해결성향의 차이분석. 영재교육연구, 17(1), 27-50.

33.
홍창희, 이재호 (2008). 초등정보과학 사이버영재교육을 위한 교육방법연구. 한국영재학회 추계학술대회 발표논문집. 131-145.

34.
홍창희, 이재호 (2009). 사이버영재교육을 위한 교수-학습 모형의 개발 및 검증. 영재교육연구, 19(1), 116-137.

35.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2001). How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student satisfaction and learning in web-based courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 42-54. crossref(new window)

36.
Arbaugh, J. B., & Hwang, A. (2006). Does "teaching presence" exist in online MBA courses? The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 9-21. crossref(new window)

37.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students' engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 261-278. crossref(new window)

38.
Berge, Z. L. (1995). The Role of the Online Instructor, Facilitator. Educational Technology. 35(1), 22-30.

39.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student Approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Victoria: Austrailian Council for Educational Research.

40.
Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 272-281. crossref(new window)

41.
Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning. London, England: Kogan Page.

42.
Collins, M. P. & Berge, Z. L. (1996), Facilitating interaction in computer mediated online courses. Background paper for presentation at the FSU/AECT Distance Education Conference, Tallahassee FL.

43.
DeBacker, T.K., & Crowson, H.M. (2006) Influences on cognitive engagement: Epistemological beliefs and need for closure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 535-551. crossref(new window)

44.
Dupeyrat, C. and Marine, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck's model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 43-59. crossref(new window)

45.
Eley, M. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23, 231-254. crossref(new window)

46.
Freeman, M. (1997). Flexibility in access, interaction and assessment: The case for web-based teaching programs. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 23-39.

47.
Grave, W., Dolmans, D., & Van Der Vleuten, C. (1999). Profiles of effective tutors in problem-based learning: scaffolding student learning. Medical Education, Medical Education, 33(12), 901-906. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999. 00492.x/full crossref(new window)

48.
Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1993). Influences on course performance: Goals, perceived ability, and self-regulation. Paper presented as a poster at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA.

49.
Heidari, F. & Galvin, K. (2002). The role of open learning in nurse education. Does it have a place? Nurse Education Today, 22(8), 617-623. crossref(new window)

50.
Ke, F. (2010). Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students. Computers & Education, 55(2), 808-820. crossref(new window)

51.
Keith, T. Z. (2006). Multiple regression and beyond. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

52.
Keller, J. M., & Suzuki, K. (1988). Use of the ARCS motivation model in courseware design. In D. H. Jonassen(Ed), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp.401-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

53.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

54.
Marks, R. B., Sibley, S. D., & Arabaugh, J. B. (2005). A structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning. Journal of Management Education, 29, 531-563. crossref(new window)

55.
Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1984). 'Approaches to learning', in Marton, F., Hounsell, D.J. and Entwistle, N. J. (Ed.), The Experience of Learning (pp. 36-55). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

56.
Mason, R. (1991). Moderating educational computer conferencing. DEOSNEWS, 1(19). (Archived as DEOSNEWS 91-00011 on PSUVM.PSU.EDU)

57.
Meece, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. (1982). Students' goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 514-523.

58.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

59.
National Survey of Student Engagement (2010). Factor Analysis 2009 Internal Structure for Deep Learning. NSSE's Psychometric Portfolio. http://nsse.iub.edu/ html/ psychometric_ portfolio.cfm

60.
Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). Measuring deep approaches to learning using the National Survey of Student Engagement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research. May, 2005, Chicago, IL. http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/conference_presentations/2006/air2006deeplearningfinal.pdf

61.
Nie, Y., & Lau, S. (2010). Differential relations of traditional and constructivist instruction to students' cognition, motivation, and achievement. Learning and Instruction, 20, 411-423. crossref(new window)

62.
Paulsen, M. F. (1995). Moderating educational computer conferences. http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/morten.html.

63.
Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 7, pp. 371-402). Greenwich CT: JAI Press.

64.
Pintrich, P. R., Roeser, R. W., & De Groot, E. A. M. (1994). Classroom and individual differences in early adolescents' motivation and self-regulated learning. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 139-161. crossref(new window)

65.
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

66.
Salomon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Kogan Page. London.

67.
Sharp, V. (1996). Computer Education for Teacher. Brown and Benchmark.

68.
Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2003). A preliminary investigation of teaching presence in the SUNY learning network. In J. Bourne and J.C. Moore (Eds), Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and direction-Vol. 4 in the Sloan-C Series (pp.279-290). Needham, MA: Sloan-C, 2003.

69.
Shea, P., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2003) A follow-up investigation of "teaching presence" in SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(2), 61-80.

70.
Shea, P., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2004). Enhancing student satisfaction through faculty development: The importance of teaching presence. In J. Bourne and J. C. Moore (Eds), Elements of quality online education: Into the mainstream -Vol. 5 in the Sloan-C Series (pp.39-59). Needham, MA.: Sloan-C, 2004.

71.
Shea, P., Sau Li, C., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190. crossref(new window)

72.
Wild, T. C., Enzle, M. E., & Hawkins, W. L. (1992). Effects of perceived extrinsic versus intrinsic teacher motivation on student reactions to skill acquisition. Personality and Social Psychology, Bulletin, 18, 245-251. crossref(new window)

73.
Wilson, K., & Fowler, J. (2005). Assessing the impact of learning environments on students' approaches to learning: comparing conventional and action learning designs. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 87-101. crossref(new window)

74.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284-290. crossref(new window)