PERCEPTIONS OF SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TOWARD BLENDED TEACHING

Các tác giả

  • Hua Hong Hieu Can Tho University, Vietnam
  • Phuong Hoang Yen Can Tho University, Vietnam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v7i2.4287

Từ khóa:

blended teaching, perceptions, science students, high school for the gifted

Tóm tắt

Under the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic, it is a must for education institutes all over the world to incorporate online teaching into their teaching program. In Vietnam, high school teachers and students are now familiar with blended teaching in which students will learn from at least 30% of their lessons online and 70% face-to-face. This research aims at investigating Vietnamese high school students’ perceptions toward the benefits and challenges of blended teaching. Two research questions will be answered (1) “What are high school students’ perceptions toward the benefits of blended teaching?” and (2) “What are high school students’ perceptions toward the challenges of blended teaching?”. There were 200 sciences students (72 participants majoring in Physics, 60 in Chemistry, and 68 in Biology) from 3 high schools for the gifted in Vietnam who participated in the study. The results of the research show that the majority of participants agreed on the benefits and challenges of blended teaching in the context of high school for the gifted in Vietnam. The current study suggests that teachers should have an effective lecture design to help their students acquire science knowledge better in blended classes.

 

Tiểu sử tác giả

  • {affiliation}

    Hua Hong Hieu is a lecturer at School of Social Sciences and Humanity, Can Tho University. His research interests include various issues of social sciences and education.

  • {affiliation}

    Phuong Hoang Yen is currently an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages, Can Tho University, Vietnam. She carries studies on language teaching approaches, students’ learning autonomy, self-regulated learning strategies and teachers’ professional development. She published articles in different journals and is the editor of one book on formative assessment in language teaching.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Birch, D. & Volkov, M. (2007). Assessment of online reflections: Engaging English second language (ESL) students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3), 291-306. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet23/birch.html

Branon, R. F. & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education: A survey of instructors. TechTrends, 45, 36-42.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education, 7(2), 95-105.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Gilbert, J. A., & Flores-Zambada, R. (2011). Development and implementation of a “blended” teaching course environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 244-260.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Hijazi, S., Crowley, M., Smith, M. L., & Shaffer, C. (2006). Maximizing learning by teaching blended courses. In Proceedings of the 2006 ASCUE Conference, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Retrieved November (Vol. 21, p. 2015).

Kim, K. J., Liu, S., & Bonk, C. J. (2005). Online MBA students' perceptions of online learning: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(4), 335-344.

Kennedy, K., & Archambault, L. (2012). Offering preservice teachers field experiences in K-12 online learning: A national survey of teacher education programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(3), 185-200. doi:10.1177/0022487111433651

Lameras, P., Levy, P., Paraskakis, I., & Webber, S. (2012). Blended university teaching using virtual learning environments: conceptions and approaches. Instructional Science, 40(1), 141-157.

Masalela, R. K. (2009). Potential benefits and complexities of blended learning in higher education: The case of the University of Botswana. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 10(1).

Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 82-93. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html

Pereira, J. A., Pleguezuelos, E., Merí, A., Molina‐Ros, A., Molina‐Tomás, M. C., & Masdeu, C. (2007). Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Medical education, 41(2), 189-195.

Roseth, C., Akcaoglu, M., & Zellner, A. (2013). Blending synchronous face-to-face and computer-supported cooperative learning in a hybrid doctoral seminar. TechTrends, 57(3), 54-59.

Sadeghi, R., Sedaghat, M. M., & Ahmadi, F. S. (2014). Comparison of the effect of lecture and blended teaching methods on students’ learning and satisfaction. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 2(4), 146.

Spanjers, I. A., Könings, K. D., Leppink, J., Verstegen, D. M., de Jong, N., Czabanowska, K., & van Merrienboer, J. J. (2015). The promised land of blended learning: Quizzes as a moderator. Educational Research Review, 15, 59-74.

Κόμης, Β., & άλ., (2010), Επιμόρφωση Εκπαιδευτικών για την Αξιοποίηση και Εφαρμογή των ΤΠΕ στη Διδακτική Πράξη. Επιμορφωτικό υλικό για την εκπαίδευση των εκπαιδευτικών στα Κέντρα Στήριξης Επιμόρφωσης. Τεύχος 2Α: Κλάδοι ΠΕ60/ΠΕ70. Πάτρα: ΥΠ.Ε.Π.Θ., Π.Ι., Ε.Α.Ι.Τ.Υ.

Κουτσογιάννης, Δ. (2011). Εφηβικές πρακτικές ψηφιακού γραμματισμού και ταυτότητες. Θεσσαλονίκη: Κέντρο Ελληνικής Γλώσσας.

Kluzer S., Pujol Priego L. (2018). DigComp into Action - Get inspired, make it happen. S. Carretero, Y. Punie, R. Vuorikari, M. Cabrera, and O’Keefe, W. (Eds.). JRC Science for Policy Report, EUR 29115 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2018. ISBN 978-92-79-79901-3, doi:10.2760/112945

Λεοντίδου, Λ. (2012). Επανακατασκευή του «ευρωπαϊκού Νότου» στη μετααποικιακή Ευρώπη: από την ταξική σύγκρουση στις πολιτισμικές ταυτότητες. Στο Α. Αφουξενίδης, (Επιμ.). Ανισότητα στην εποχή της κρίσης: Θεωρητικές και εμπειρικές διερευνήσεις (σσ. 25-42). Αθήνα: Προπομπός

Mikeli Preradovi, N. Lešin, G. & Boras, D. (2017). The Role and Attitudes of Kindergarten Educators in ICT-Supported Early Childhood Education. TEM Journal. 6 (1), 162- 172. DOI: 10.18421/TEM61-24.

NAEYC. 2009b. “NAEYC Standards for Early Childhood Professional Preparation Programs.” Position statement. Washington, DC: Author. www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/ProfPrepStandards09.pdf

Nikolopoulou, K. (2014). Educational Software Use in kindergartens: Findings from Greece. In C. Karagiannidis, P. Politis, & I. Karasavvidis (Eds.), Research on e- Learning and ICT in Education. Berlin: Springer.

Nolan, J. & McBride, M. (2014) Beyond gamification: reconceptualizing game-based learning in early childhood environments, Information, Communication & Society, 17:5, 594-608, DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.808365

OECD Indicators (2003). Education at a Glance, http://www.oecd.org/edu/eag2003, Accessed March 17, 2021

Perrenoud, P. (1995). Des savoirs aux compétences: De quoi parle-t-on en parlant de compétences? Pédagogie Collégiale, 9(1), 20–24

Piaget, J. (1958). The psychology of intelligence, Athens, "Athena"

Shearer B. (2018). Multiple Intelligences in Teaching and Education: Lessons Learned from Neuroscience. Journal of Intelligence, 6(3), 38.

Smuseva, D. A., & Rolich, A. Y. (2018). Research and software development using AR technology. Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1050, No. 1, p. 012080). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1050/1/012080.

Lượt tải xuống

Đã Xuất bản

2022-05-14

Số

Tập 7 Số 2 (2022)

Chuyên mục

Articles

Giấy phép

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).