Document Type : scientific-research
Author
عضو هیات علمی
Abstract
This research aimed to study the relationship between learning styles among two groups of electronic and traditional students in PAYAM NOOR University and its relationship with the satisfaction. The research method was descriptive and co relational research. The study population included all male and female master students of electronic (virtual) (N=1400) and traditional (N=1600) courses of PNU in 1395-1396.Using Cochran formula, the estimated sample size of students for traditional and electronic courses were equal to 310 and 302 respectively (totaled 612). The sample size was selected by stratified random sampling method with proportional assignment. In order to collect data, Kolb (1999) learning styles questionnaire and Bahrani and Jokar (1378) critical student satisfaction questionnaire were used. For both, traditional and electronic groups, between learning styles (convergent, divergent, assimilator and accommodator) and satisfaction, there was a significant relationship. The results showed that in the traditional course converging, diverging, assimilator and accommodator styles have the highest relationship with the academic satisfaction. In electronic courses, divergent, assimilator, and convergent styles have the most relation to academic satisfaction. The study of the status of learning styles in the electronic group showed that the convergent learning style with (14.57%), has the least frequency, divergent with (30.79%) has the highest frequency, the assimilator style has (28.14%) and the accommodator has (26.49%) frequency. Regarding the status of learning styles in the traditional group, convergent and accommodator style have the least frequency and the assimilator learning style has the most frequency. In terms of quality assessment, most students were not satisfied with the traditional courses and in contrast, the electronic group had more academic satisfaction.
Keywords
Article Title [Persian]
مطالعه تطبیقی سبک های یادگیری دردانشجویان دوره های یادگیری الکترونیکی و عادی دانشگاه پیام نور وارتباط آن با رضایت مندی از کیفیت دوره های تحصیلی آنان
Author [Persian]
- فروزان ضرابیان
Abstract [Persian]
این پژوهش با هدف مطالعه تطبیقی سبک های یادگیری و ارتباظ آن با رضایت مندی تحصیلی در دانشجویان دو گروه الکترونیک و عادی انجام پذیرفته است.روش پژوهش از نوع پژوهش‌های توصیفی از نوع همبستگی بود. جامعه پژوهش کلیه دانشجویان دختر و پسر کارشناسی ارشد دوره های الکترونیکی (مجازی) و عادی (سنتی) رشته های علوم انسانی و فنی مهندسی و علوم پایه دانشگاه پیام نور اصفهان شامل1400 دانشجوی دوره الکترونیکی و 1600 دانشجودر دوره های عادی در سال 1395-1396 بوده که با استفاده از فرمون کوکران تعداد دانشجویان دوره های عادی 310 دانشجو .و حجم نمونه دانشجویان دوره های الکترونیکی 302 که در کل 612 تعیین گردید. حجم نمونه با روش نمونه گیری نمونه تصادفی طبقه ای با انتساب متناسب انتخاب شدند. به منظور گردآوری داده ها از پرسشنامه سبک های یادگیری کلب (1999) و پرسشنامه رضایت تحصیلی بحرانی و جوکار (1378) استفاده گردید. هم در گروه عادی و هم گروه الکترونیکی بین سبک های یادگیری (همگرا، واگرا، جذب کننده و انطباق یابنده) و رضایتمندی رابطه معناداری وجود دارد . نتایج نشان داد که در دوره های عادی سبک همگرا، سبک واگرا جذب کنندهو انطباق یابنده دارای بیشترین رابطه را با رضایت تحصیلی را دارند. در دوره های الکترونیکی سبک واگرا، جذب کننده، انطباق یابنده و همگرا دارای بیشترین ارتباط با رضایت تحصیلی هستند. بررسی وضعیت سبک های یادگیری در گروه الکترونیکی نشان داد که سبک یادگیری همگرا با (57/14%) کمترین فراوانی، واگرا با (79/30%) بیشترین فراوانی ، سبک جذب کننده با (14/28%) و انطباق یابنده با 8(49/26%) فراوانی می باشند .بر رسی وضعیت سبک های یادگیری در گروه عادی سبک های همگرا و انطباق یابنده دارای کمترین فراوانی است و سبک یادگیری جذب کننده بیشترین فراوانی را به خود اختصاص داد. ازنظر ستجش کیفیت دردوره های عادی بیشتر دانشجویان دارای عدم رضایت تحصیلی بودند و در مقابل در گروه الکترونیکی بیشتر دارای رضایت تحصیلی بودند.
Keywords [Persian]
- سبک های یادگیری
- رضایت مندی کیفی دوره تحصیلی
- یادگیری الکترونیکی
- دوره حضوری
- دانشجو
[1] Torkashvand, Masoumeh (1395). Phenomenological Study of Learning Culture in Virtual
Education (Master's degree in virtual science and Technology University).
[2] Chereb A, Vesin B, Ivanović M, Budimac Z. E-Learning personalization based on hybrid
recommendation strategy and learning style identification. Computers & Education, 56(3).
pp.885–899.
[3] Manochehr, N-N. (2007). The Influence of Learning Styles on Learners in E-Learning
Environments: An Empirical Study.Information Systems Department, Qatar University.
CHEER, 18(1), pp. 10-14.
[4] Vermunt, J.D. (2014) Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles
and strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. KluwerAcademic Publishers. Printed in the
Netherlands, Higher Education, 31, pp. 25-50
[5] Case, T. (2002). Successful Implementation of E-learning Pedagogical Considerations.
The Internet and Higher Education, 4, pp. 287-299
[6] Fazeli, Nemat A. (1395). Culture and university. Tehran: Salis Publishin.
[7] Fairlie.Holleran.W. (2012) Entrepreneurship training, risk aversion and other personality
Forouzan Zarabian: The Comparative Study of Learning Styles Among Students in The 59
traits: Evidence from a random experiment. Journal of Economic Psychology. 33, pp. 366–
378
[8] Faiez, D. (2008). Effect of gender on entrepreneurial characteristics of students,women
social - Psychological studies, seven years, 2, pp. 41-21.
[9] Zhang. Li – F, (2010), D0 Thinking Styles contribute to academic achievement beyond
abilities? Journal of Psychology 135, pp. 621 – 637.
[10] Zahrakar, Kianoush. (1386). Investigating the Relationship between the Components of
Emotional Intelligence and Academic Performance. Applied Psychology,2(5), pp. 98-89
[11] Abdollahpour, Mohammad Azad, Kadivar, Parvin, Abdollahi, Mohammad Hossein.
(1384). The Relationship between Cognitive Styles and Cognitive and Metacognitive
Strategies with Academic Achievement. Psychology research. 8(3,4), pp. 44-30
[12] Zhang. Li – Fang, (2016), Thinking Styles and modes of Thinking: implications for
education and research Journal of Psychol ,136 (3), pp. 245 – 61.
[13] Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E. (2006). The Big Five personality dimensions and
recomendatione. Psychology research. 8(3,4), pp. 4, 10.
[14] Smite, Kn. (2018). recommender agent based on learning styles for better virtual
collaborative learning experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, (2016).45, pp.243–
253.
[15]Truong HM. (2015). Integrating learning styles and accommodator e-learning system:
Current developments, problems and opportunities. Computers in Human Behavior.
[16]Vasileva-Stojanovska T, Malinovski T, Vasileva M, Jovevski D, Trajkovik V. (2015)
Impact of satisfaction, personality and learning style on educational outcomes in a blended
learning environment. Learning and Individual Differences ,3(8), pp. 127–135.
[17] Deborah LJ, Baskaran R, Kannan, (2014). A Learning styles assessment and theoretical
origin in an E-learning scenario: a survey. Artificial Intelligence Review.42(4), pp. 801-
819.
[18] Akbulut Y., CardakCS. (2012), Accommodator educational hypermedia accommodating
learning styles: A content analysis of publications from 2000 to 2011. Computers &
Education. 58(2), pp. 835–842.
[19] Huang E Y, Lin S W and Huang T K. (2012), What type of learning style leads to online
participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage
instruction.58(1), pp. 338–349.
[20] Mohammadzadeh Ghasr, Ebrahimi, Somayeh, Kooshk, Mehdi, Bahmanabadi, Somayeh,
Rahmanif Davood and Asadi, Reza (1395), Identifying the learning styles of employees
of Medical Sciences of Mashhad University for Electronic adaptation in just in-time
training, Media, 4(1).
[21] Khorasani Abasalt & Hooman, Doosti (1394) Evaluation of Satisfaction and Importance
of Effective Factors on the Effectiveness of E-Learning from Employees Viewpoint (Case
Study: Bank Saman), Quarterly Journal of Information and Communication Technology
in Educational Sciences, first year, 4, pp. 37-58.
[22] Sale.S.Soleimani,B.Amini,P.SHahnoushi,E.(2005) Asurvey of between Learning style
and Prefeered Teaching methods in students of nursing , Isfahan university of medical
sciences. Iranian Journal of medical Education,1(1), pp.42-48.
[23] Valizadeh,L.Fathiazar,E.Zamanzadeh,V.(2006).Nursing and Midwifery students ˙
Learning style in Tabriz Medical university. Iranian Journal of medical Education.6(2),
pp.136-140.
[24] Kalbasi,S.Naseri,M.Sharif,G.Poursafar,A.(2008). Medical students˙Learning style in
Birjand university of Medical sciences. SDME.5(1), pp.10-16.
[25] Meyari,A.Sabouri kashani,A. GHarib, M.Beiglarkhanh,M.(2010). COMPARISON
60 Quarterly Journal of Iranian Distance Education (IDEJ), Vol. 1, No. 4, Spring 2019
BETWEEN THE learning style of medicalFreshmen and Fifth-year students and its
relationship with their educational achievement. SDME, 6(2), pp.110-118.
[26] Najafi,M.Karimi,SH,Jamshidi,N.(2010).comparison of Learning style and referred
teaching methods of students in Fasa University of Medical Sciences. Arak Medical
University Journal.12(4), pp.89-94.
[27] Rezaei,k.Kohestani,H.Ganjeh,F.Anbari,Z.(2008).Learning style of first semester
students in Arak. Arak university of Medical Sciences Journal,12(4), pp.44-51.
[28] Pouratashi,M.Movahed Mohammadi, H. Shabanali Fami, H.(1388). Learning style OF
Agricultural students. Oloom tarvij va amoozeshe keshavarzi Iran.5(1), pp.37-46.
[29] Yazdee, M. (2008). students Learning style in different faculties of Alzahra university:
the key to the identification of professional direction, New thougths on Education. 5(2),
pp.123-144.
[30] Kayes, D. C., (2005), Internal validity and reliability of Kolb’s revised Learning Style
Inventory. Journal of Business and Psychology,20(2), pp. 249-257.
)