Browsing by Author "Hodges, Charles B."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online LearningHodges, Charles B.; Moore, Stephanie; Lockee, Barbara B.; Trust, Torrey; Bond, Mark Aaron (Educause, 2020-03-27)Well-planned online learning experiences are meaningfully different from courses offered online in response to a crisis or disaster. Colleges and universities working to maintain instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic should understand those differences when evaluating this emergency remote teaching.
- Exploration of Factors Affecting the Self-Efficacy of Asynchronous Online Learners: a Mixed Methods StudyJohnson, Alicia Leinaala (Virginia Tech, 2017-04-25)This study explored former and current graduate and undergraduate online students' self-efficacy perceptions for asynchronous online coursework. Self-efficacy is described as a person's judgment of his or her ability to successfully complete a learning or performance task (Bandura, 1997). Using an exploratory sequential mixed methods approach, this study explored the research question in three phases: 1) Conducted interviews and analyzed transcripts of 11 current and previous asynchronous online learners; 2) Created and enlisted the expert review of a survey instrument developed from the interview data analysis; and 3) Collected and analyzed survey responses from current and previous asynchronous online learners. The findings from this research show, based on 215 participant responses, several factors present or absent in asynchronous online learning experiences have positive, negative or no effects on perceived self-efficacy to complete online course requirements. Findings, limitations, practical implications and future research ideas are discussed in Chapter Six of this document.
- Self-efficacy, Motivational Email, and Achievement in an Asynchronous Mathematics CourseHodges, Charles B. (Virginia Tech, 2005-11-28)This study investigated the effects of motivational email messages on learner self-efficacy and achievement in an asynchronous college algebra and trigonometry course. A pretest-posttest control group design was used. Of the 196 initial participants randomly assigned to treatment groups, 125 participants with an average age of 18.21 years completed the study. The final control and experimental groups consisted of 57 (n=17 male, n=40 female) and 68 (n=14 male, n=54 female) participants respectively. Self-efficacy to learn mathematics asynchronously (SELMA) was measured before the treatment was administered. Email messages designed to be efficacy enhancing were sent to the experimental group weekly for 4 weeks. The control group was sent email messages designed to be neutral with respect to self-efficacy weekly for 4 weeks. SELMA and math achievement were measured after the email messages were sent in week 4. Analysis of covariance was performed using the pretest SELMA measure as a covariate to detect post-treatment differences in SELMA between the control and experimental groups. No significant differences were detected at the 0.05 alpha level. Paired-sample t-Tests revealed significant increases in SELMA for both the control and experimental groups over the treatment period. Linear regression analysis revealed a weak positive relationship between SELMA and math achievement. The findings are discussed in the context of the related literature and directions for future research are suggested.
- Understanding pandemic pedagogy: Differences between emergency remote, remote, and online teachingBarbour, Michael K.; LaBonte, Randy; Hodges, Charles B.; Moore, Stephanie; Lockee, Barbara B.; Trust, Torrey; Bond, Mark Aaron; Hill, Phil; Kelly, Kevin (2020-12-21)In the spring of 2020, the term ‘emergency remote teaching’ began to emerge to describe what was occurring in education at all levels, despite the more commonly used term “online learning” dominating media descriptions of the instruction offered to students forced to remain at home. Hodges et al. (2020) described emergency remote teaching as an attempt not “to re-create a robust educational ecosystem but rather to provide temporary access to instruction and instructional supports in a manner that is quick to set up and is reliably available during an emergency or crisis” (¶ 13). As the new school year began, most education jurisdictions across Canada offered some combination of face-to-face, hybrid, and/or online instruction for students, including pre-existing online learning programs. Yet both designed and established online learning programs and the remote teaching offered by classroom teachers were still described by many as “online learning”, ignoring the clear differences between both instructional methods. This report is a collection of revised works from other scholars, primarily focused on the higher education context, adapted for the K-12 sector. These works include a recent article that was published in EDUCAUSE Review entitled “The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning” (Hodges et al., 2020); as well as a number of blog entries from PhilOnEdTech blog (Hill, 2020; Kelly, 2020a, 2020b; Moore & Hill, 2020). Throughout the report, we have attempted to identify each of the sections that relied upon these sources. Soon the COVID-19 threat will diminish, yet when it does we should not simply abandon remote teaching and return to our prior classroom-only practices without ensuring that we preserve the lessons of 2020 for future public health and safety issues. For example, in recent years school campuses have been closed due to natural disasters such as wildfires, hurricanes, earthquakes, and the polar vortex (Baytiyeh, 2018; Mackey et al., 2012; Samson, 2020; Watkins, 2005). As such, the possible need for remote teaching – in both emergency situations and more planned contexts – must become part of a teacher’s skill set. This report argues the importance of avoiding equating emergency remote teaching with online learning. It is clear from most schools and teacher’s experience with emergency remote teaching that much more planning and deliberate attention be provided to teacher preparation, infrastructure, education policy, and resources to be able to maintain quality instructional continuity during a crisis. This report offers recommendations for how schools can be better prepared for future crises that incorporate both home-based and school-based learning opportunities mediated through online learning environments. While it is clear that schools remain a good place for children to be supported in their emotional growth and learning, with proper planning and good communication, homes and communities outside of school walls can be as well.