An Exploratory Study of the Student’s Learning Experience by Applying Different Tools for e-Learning and e-Teaching

Authors: Angel Daniel Muñoz Guzmán

Abstract:

E-learning is becoming more and more common every day. For online, hybrid or traditional face-to-face programs, there are some e-teaching platforms like Google classroom, Blackboard, Moodle and Canvas, and there are platforms for full e-learning like Coursera, edX or Udemy. These tools are changing the way students acquire knowledge at schools; however, in today’s changing world that is not enough. As students’ needs and skills change and become more complex, new tools will need to be added to keep them engaged and potentialize their learning. This is especially important in the current global situation that is changing everything: the Covid-19 pandemic. Due to Covid-19, education had to make an unexpected switch from face-to-face courses to digital courses. In this study, the students’ learning experience is analyzed by applying different e-tools and following the Tec21 Model and a flexible and digital model, both developed by the Tecnologico de Monterrey University. The evaluation of the students’ learning experience has been made by the quantitative PrEmo method of emotions. Findings suggest that the quantity of e-tools used during a course does not affect the students’ learning experience as much as how a teacher links every available tool and makes them work as one in order to keep the student engaged and motivated.

Keywords: Student, experience, e-learning, e-teaching, e-tools, technology, education.

References:

[1] A. B. Mostafa Abedi, «Rise of Massive Open Online Courses» 4th International Congress on Engineering Education, pp. 1-4, 2012.
[2] T. W. S. Jane M. Sileo, «Academic Dishonesty and Online Classes: A Rural Education Perspective» Rural Special Education Quarterly, pp. 27(2), 55-60, 2008.
[3] C. Aslanian, «You’re never too old: Excerpts from adult students today» Community College Journal, pp. 56-58, 2001.
[4] B. Smith, «E-learning technologies: A comparative study of adult learners enrolled on blended and online campuses engaging in a virtual classroom» de ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database, 2010.
[5] T. &. J. S. S. Bailey, « Effectiveness of fully online courses for college students: Response to a Department of Education meta-analysis» New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center, 2010.
[6] B. Guenter, «Studying distance education at community colleges,» Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, pp. 10(2), 119–126, 2003.
[7] T. E. Chambers, « Internet course student achievement: In Ohio’s two-year community and technical colleges, are online courses less effective than traditional courses?» Unpublished doctoral dissertation, 2002.
[8] J. Di Xu, «The effectiveness of distance education across Virginia’s Community Colleges: Evidence from introductory college-level math and English» Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, pp. 33(3), 360-377, 2011.
[9] M. Patterson B., «Attrition in online and campus degree programs» Journal of Distance Learning Administration, p. 12(2), 2009.
[10] V. Tinto, «Dropout from Higher Education: A Theoretical Synthesis of Recent Research» Review of Educational Research, pp. 45(1), 89-125, 1975.
[11] J. Gaytan, «Factors Affecting Student Retention in Online Courses: Overcoming this Critical Problem» Career and Technical Education Research, pp. 38(2), 147-155, 2013.
[12] C. White, «Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A metaanalysis» Review of Educational Research, pp. 77(1), 113-143., 2007.
[13] C. Dweck, «Motivational processes affecting learning» American Psychologist, pp. 41, 1040–1048, 1986.
[14] A. Gorbunovs, «Self-discipline as a key indicator to improve learning outcomes in elearning environment» Social and Behavioral Sciences, p. 256 – 262, 2016.
[15] D. Munoz, «Blending Gamification and Project-based Learning with Rapid Prototyping Technologies in Enhancing Students' Learning of Design» Conference: 2019 11th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers, pp. 210-214, 2019.
[16] D. Boud, Using Experience for Learning, UK: McGraw-Hill Education, 1993.
[17] C. C. B. V. Carlos Ramirez, «Non-Invasive Technology on a Classroom Chair for Detection of Emotions Used for the Personalization of Learning Resources,» International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 2010.
[18] N. ECIU, «ECIU,» 14 02 2020. (En línea). Available: https://www.eciu.org/news/world-bank-case-study-on-tecs-educational-model.
[19] ITESM, «Tecnologico de Monterrey» 11 04 2020. (En línea). Available: https://tec.mx/es/modelo-tec21.
[20] MFD, «TEC» 12 04 2020. (En línea). Available: https://tec.mx/es/mdf-plus.
[21] D. Norman, «Measuring Emotion» The Design Journal, p. 6(2), 2003.
[22] P. Desmet, «Designing Emotions» 2002.
[23] EmotionStudio, «PrEmo» 29 3 2020. (En línea). Available: https://www.premotool.com/.
[24] D. Boer, «Is a single-item visual analogue scale as valid, reliable and responsive as multi-item scales in measuring quality of life?» Quality of Life Research, pp. 13(2), 311-320, 2004.
[25] B. R. R. a. P. R. Kort, «An Affective Model of Interplay between Emotions and Learning» IEEE, Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 43-46, 2001.
[26] D. K. Raafat George Saadé, «The Emotional State of Technology Acceptance» Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology , 2006.
[27] B. Weiner, «An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion» Psychological Review, 1985.
[28] F. B. Mottet, «Theorizing about instructional communication» Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives, 2006.
[29] C. F. Brooks, «Emotion in online college classrooms: examining the influence of perceived teacher communication behaviour on students’ emotional experiences,» Technology, Pedagogy and Education, pp. 24(4), 515-527, 2015.
[30] M. Cebrián, Innovar con tecnologías aplicadas a la docencia universitaria, MAdrid: Narcea Ediciones, 2003, pp. 21-36.