Evaluation of E-Learning Management Models and Providing a Model for Implementation of E-learning.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24200/jsshr.vol2iss02pp56-61Abstract
The purpose of this research is to survey Evaluation of E-Learning Management Model and Providing a Model for Implementation of E-learning for universities. Methodology: The method for research is descriptive and non-experimental and from the point of analysis is correlative. For verifying and measuring the elements of E-learning model, A Researcher made questionnaire with 127 items was used. Validity and reliability of the initial performances were investigated. For The validity of the initial questionnaire, through a survey of 75 experts, was confirmed by 94%. The factor for questionnaire Reliability 0.986 was considered. From virtual universities 462 person from male and female teachers and students were selected as the statistical society. The method of correlation analysis was used in analyzing data. For verifying the elements of E-learning one sample t-test was used and for Reduction of variables factor analysis was used. Results: The most important results of the research are: 19 factors were identified for Integrated E-learning model: (1) policies and strategies (2) educational systems and processes (3) infrastructure (4) characteristics of learners (5) needs and demand (6) services (7) psychological aspects (8) e-learning technical skills (9) knowledge and attitudes of teachers (10) general skills (11) fitness (12) past experience (13) quality (14) monitoring (15)content ( 16) motivation (17) interaction and communication (18) support (19) goals and priorities. Conclusion: This model is composed of three main layers: (1) objectives and policies (2) structure and process (3) services and support.References
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. 1988. Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 8(1), 2-10.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. 2004. The Systematic The Systematic Design of Instruction Design of Instruction. In: New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. 1999. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 1992. The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance.
Khan, B. H. 2004. The People—Process—Product Continuum in E-Learning: The E-Learning P3 Model. Educational Technology, 44(5), 33-40.
Lambert, E, 2003. The impact of organizational justice on correctional staff. Journal of criminal justice.
Mc.Dowall, A. & Fletcher, C. 2004. Employee development: an organizational justice perspective, Personnel Review, 133(1).
Picard, J. 2007. Creating virtual work teams using IP videoconferencing. Presentation at the Distance Education Technology ' 99Workshop, Edmonton, Alberta.
Scanfura, T.A. 1999. Rethinking Leader-Member Exchange: An Organizational Justice Perspective, Leadership Quartely, 10, 25-40.
Rosenberg, S. A. 2001. Progress in human tumour immunology and immunotherapy. Nature, 411(6835), 380.
Simmons, D. E. 2002. The forum report: E-learning adoption rates and barriers. The ASTD e-learning handbook, 19-23.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. 2005. Instructional design: John Wiley & Sons
