Editorial - Volume 22, Issue 3 by Rory McGreal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Volume 22, Number 3
Rory McGreal
Editor-in-Chief, Athabasca University
In a time of increased wariness caused by a pandemic, global warming, and international conflicts, it is a relief to read papers that focus on the effectiveness of educational technology innovations in online learning that feature collaboration among researchers and countries and the linkage of ideas and processes. Our first three articles do just that, specifically attending to issues around OER and open courses. Teacher presence is the focus of the next two articles, while the sustainability of learning technologies and the preferences of learners are discussed in the last two research articles. In addition, we have notes addressing business models and instructional design issues, followed by literature reviews on learning in museums, training mathematics teachers, and synchronous learning.
The first article by Rodrigues, Schneider, Sokolovic, Brunsek Oré, Perlman, and Jenkins refers to “open source courses” rather than the more accepted term “OER.” Their research showed that the courses were effective in improving student achievement, with high student satisfaction. They discuss the implications for research and practice.
Kim, Bindoff, Farrow, McInerney, Borchard, and Doherty investigated the learning achievement of students in an English-language MOOC on dementia using the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale. To no one’s surprise, the native English speakers scored significantly higher than the non-native English speakers. However, there was no significant difference in the course completion rates of the two groups.
Self-Determination Theory was used by Werth and Williams to determine the motivation of students taught using open pedagogy. They suggest that agency has an impact on motivation and make recommendations on autonomous forms of motivation. No data is provided on learning achievement.
A Community of Inquiry framework was used by Flock, Maeda, and Richardson to study teaching presence. Their investigation showed significant differences among individual teachers in their teaching presence scores, with one exception. They make suggestions for future research in this area.
Instructor presence is also the focus of Glazier and Harris’s paper, along with student satisfaction. They surveyed over 12,000 U.S. university students engaged in both online and traditional modes of learning. The survey results showed that students felt clear instructions and instructor availability were important. The authors recommended more training in course design for faculty. No data on student achievement was provided.
Using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Espino, Artal, and Betancor investigate the useful life span and cost-effectiveness of video lectures. Their results suggest that video longevity is affected by production style and dynamic videos are associated with longer life spans. They recommend Screencast and make other practical suggestions.
Vasquez-Cano and Diez-Arcón investigated the level of satisfaction among university students using Facebook groups. Their survey results showed higher levels of satisfaction along with more interactions compared with students who only used the learning management system. Students using Facebook groups felt that they could better focus on learning and achieving better results; however, no data on test and examination results are provided.
The Notes section includes Cisel and Pontalier’s analysis addressing the motivations and strategies of instructors and Kartal’s book review on inclusive course design by Gunawardena, Frechette, and Layne.
The Literature Review section lists three papers covering distance/online education in museums by Ennes and Lee; Nongni’s challenges for training mathematics teachers; and a meta-analysis on the effects of synchronous learning by Martin, Sun, Turk, and Ritzhaupt.
Editorial - Volume 22, Issue 3 by Rory McGreal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.