Xuehan Zhou , Qiujie Li , Di Xu , XunFei Li , Christian Fischer
{"title":"大学在线课程在脚手架方面有很强的设计,但在支持学生代理和互动方面差异很大","authors":"Xuehan Zhou , Qiujie Li , Di Xu , XunFei Li , Christian Fischer","doi":"10.1016/j.iheduc.2023.100912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study develops a rubric comprising three quality concepts critical to addressing online learning challenges: <em>Scaffolding</em>, which supports student self-regulated learning processes; <em>Student Agency</em>, which promotes student choices and voices; and <em>Social Presence and Interpersonal Interaction</em>, which enhances student connection with peers and instructors. We then examine the extent to which college online courses reflect the three concepts following a 3-point scoring scale (“beginning,” “developing,” or “proficient”) based on observation data collected from 100 randomly selected courses. Our results indicate that about two-thirds of the courses score at or above the developing level, demonstrating some but insufficient incorporation of design features that can enhance the three concepts. While most courses are above the developing level for “Scaffolding,” less than half and less than one-third reach the developing level for the other two concepts. We further identify variations in course design based on instructor characteristics, where female instructors, instructors with higher educational attainment, and instructors teaching fewer credit hours had higher scores.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48186,"journal":{"name":"Internet and Higher Education","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 100912"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"College online courses have strong design in scaffolding but vary widely in supporting student agency and interactivity\",\"authors\":\"Xuehan Zhou , Qiujie Li , Di Xu , XunFei Li , Christian Fischer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.iheduc.2023.100912\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study develops a rubric comprising three quality concepts critical to addressing online learning challenges: <em>Scaffolding</em>, which supports student self-regulated learning processes; <em>Student Agency</em>, which promotes student choices and voices; and <em>Social Presence and Interpersonal Interaction</em>, which enhances student connection with peers and instructors. We then examine the extent to which college online courses reflect the three concepts following a 3-point scoring scale (“beginning,” “developing,” or “proficient”) based on observation data collected from 100 randomly selected courses. Our results indicate that about two-thirds of the courses score at or above the developing level, demonstrating some but insufficient incorporation of design features that can enhance the three concepts. While most courses are above the developing level for “Scaffolding,” less than half and less than one-third reach the developing level for the other two concepts. We further identify variations in course design based on instructor characteristics, where female instructors, instructors with higher educational attainment, and instructors teaching fewer credit hours had higher scores.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Internet and Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"58 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100912\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Internet and Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751623000106\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet and Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751623000106","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
College online courses have strong design in scaffolding but vary widely in supporting student agency and interactivity
This study develops a rubric comprising three quality concepts critical to addressing online learning challenges: Scaffolding, which supports student self-regulated learning processes; Student Agency, which promotes student choices and voices; and Social Presence and Interpersonal Interaction, which enhances student connection with peers and instructors. We then examine the extent to which college online courses reflect the three concepts following a 3-point scoring scale (“beginning,” “developing,” or “proficient”) based on observation data collected from 100 randomly selected courses. Our results indicate that about two-thirds of the courses score at or above the developing level, demonstrating some but insufficient incorporation of design features that can enhance the three concepts. While most courses are above the developing level for “Scaffolding,” less than half and less than one-third reach the developing level for the other two concepts. We further identify variations in course design based on instructor characteristics, where female instructors, instructors with higher educational attainment, and instructors teaching fewer credit hours had higher scores.
期刊介绍:
The Internet and Higher Education is a quarterly peer-reviewed journal focused on contemporary issues and future trends in online learning, teaching, and administration within post-secondary education. It welcomes contributions from diverse academic disciplines worldwide and provides a platform for theory papers, research studies, critical essays, editorials, reviews, case studies, and social commentary.