Postgraduate Students’ Perspective on Supporting “Learning From Home” to Solve the COVID-19 Pandemics
Abstract
It is very important to study this topic because it is a novel education process applied in the postgraduate program in UHAMKA. The objective of this present research was to reveal how the postgraduate student perceive of or respond to the online learning process. A mixed method between qualitative and quantitative ones was adopted in this present research. The research results showed that most students who had experienced of the online learning activities encountered some obstacles because they had never conducted “LFH (Learning From Home) activities before. The respondents were 428 postgraduate students who actively joined in the “LFH” activities. From the students, 316 students used the platform zoom as the supporting application in the LFH activities. The respondents filled in the Google Form, then the collected data could be quickly and accurately processed. Other respondents preferred the google classroom, the whatsapp and other applications in following the learning activities according to the agreement and features provided in each flat form. There were 408 respondents stating that there was a two-way communication between the lecturers and the students during the LFH activities. They stated that the limited Internet network hindered the online lecturing. Thirty one respondents declared that technology limitations hampered the online lecturing, and 105 students revealed that it is the limitations in using the application that caused the online lecturing to become obstacles
Keywords
References
A Taxonomy of Factors to Promote Quality Web-Supported Learning 1 Jill W. Fresen (PhD), University of Pretoria, South Africa. (2007). 6(3), 351–362.
Alexander, B., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M. (2016). Digital Literacy An NMC Horizon Project Strategic Brief. Scientific American, 273(3), 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0995-190
Allan, S. (2020). Migration and transformation: A sociomaterial analysis of practitioners’ experiences with online exams. Research in Learning Technology, 28(1063519), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2279
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual Classroom Characteristics and Student Satisfaction with Internet-Based MBA Courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104
Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133
Browne, C., Mendoza, A., Sindermann, A., & Holland, B. (2017). Students as Co-creators of an Online Learning Resource. Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 1(21).
Burnett, K., Bonnici, L. J., Miksa, S. D., & Kim, J. (2007). Frequency , Intensity and Topicality in Online Learning : An Exploration of the Interaction Dimensions that Contribute to Student Satisfaction in Online Learning. 48(1), 21–36.
Crawford-Ferre, Heather GlynnWiest, Lynda R. (2012). Effective Online Instruction in Higher Education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 11–14.
Darmayanti, T., Setiani, M. Y., & Oetojo, B. (2007). E-Learning pada pendidikan jarak jauh: konsep yang mengubah metode pembelajaran di perguruan tinggi di Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan Terbuka Dan Jarak Jauh, 8, 99–113.
Ferrell, G. (2014). Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA): a landscape review. August, 46. http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/5599/
Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Rogers, T., & Gasevic, D. (2016). Learning analytics should not promote one size fits all: The effects of instructional conditions in predicting academic success. Internet and Higher Education, 28(June 2019), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.10.002
Gelan, A., Fastré, G., Verjans, M., Martin, N., Janssenswillen, G., Creemers, M., Lieben, J., Depaire, B., & Thomas, M. (2018). Affordances and limitations of learning analytics for computer-assisted language learning: a case study of the VITAL project. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3), 294–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1418382
Harasim, L. (2000). Harasim2000. 3, 41–61.
Herodotou, C., Zdrahal, Z., Rienties, B., Hlosta, M., Boroowa, A., & Naydenova, G. (2017). Implementing predictive learning analytics on a large scale: The teacher’s perspective. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, July 2018, 267–271. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027397
Iqbal, M. J., & Ahmad, M. (2010). Enhancing quality of education through e-learning: The case study of Allama Iqbal Open University. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11(1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.23439
Kim, K., Liu, S., & Bonk, C. J. (2005). Online MBA students ’ perceptions of online learning : Benefits , challenges , and suggestions. 8, 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.09.005
Muller, K., Gradel, K., Forte, M., Mccabe, R., Pickett, A. M., Piorkowski, R., Scalzo, K., & Sullivan, R. (2019). Assessing Student Learning in the Online Modality. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA), 40, 1.
Nielsen, W., Hoban, G., & Hyland, C. J. T. (2017). Pharmacology students’ perceptions of creating multimodal digital explanations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(2), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp00244g
Nugroho, A. (2012). Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Jarak Jauh Berbasis Web. Jurnal Transformatika, 9(2), 72. https://doi.org/10.26623/transformatika.v9i2.60
Oliver, B., & Goerke, V. (2007). Australian undergraduates’ use and ownership of emerging technologies: Implications and opportunities for creating engaging learning experiences for the Net Generation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1263
Palvia, S., Aeron, P., Gupta, P., Mahapatra, D., Parida, R., Rosner, R., & Sindhi, S. (2018). Online Education: Worldwide Status, Challenges, Trends, and Implications. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262
Reyna, J., & Meier, P. (2020). Co-creation of knowledge using mobile technologies and digital media as pedagogical devices in undergraduate STEM education. Research in Learning Technology, 28(1063519), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2356
Rienties, B., & Toetenel, L. (2016). The impact of learning design on student behaviour, satisfaction and performance: A cross-institutional comparison across 151 modules. Computers in Human Behavior, 60(July), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.074
Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in Web-based Online Learning Environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102–120.
Sorensen, C., & Baylen, D. M. (1999). Interaction in Interactive Television Instruction: Perception versus Reality. 1999 Conference of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Montreal, Canada, 150.
Study, A. C. (2009). Utilizing Online Exams : 6(8), 1–8.
Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15(2016), 157–190. https://doi.org/10.28945/3502
Tait, A. (2018). Open Universities: the next phase. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 13(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-12-2017-0040
Uri, E. (2005). Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students ’ Learning.
Weller, M. (2007). The distance from isolation. Why communities are the logical conclusion in e-learning. Computers and Education, 49(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.015
DOI: http://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i2.21240
Total views : 11 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2021 Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science
International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)
p-ISSN: 2252-8822, e-ISSN: 2620-5440
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.