The Teaching Effectiveness and Learners ...

The Teaching Effectiveness and Learners’ Satisfaction in Distance Education of the Undergraduate Programme for In-service Teachers Chong Ai Peng, Norihan Yusuf, Lina Guo, Charles Aliche, Murat Ozturk, Shaffe Mohd Daud Universiti Putra Malaysia Abstract This paper seeks to present the teaching effectiveness and satisfaction in the Distance Education of the Undergraduate Programme for Teachers (Program Pensiswazahan Guru or PPG in Malay language) in the Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for the 2015 academic session. The study aimed to understand the effectiveness and learners’ satisfaction of this particular educational programme based on learners’ viewpoints. The teaching effectiveness constructs comprised five dimensions: students’ development, assessment, course materials, online component and face-to-face component of the program. Data were collected from a sample of 31 undergraduate students from Bachelor of Education (Primary Education). Results exhibits a moderate level of both the effectiveness and learners ‘satisfaction towards the PPG program. Analysis Pearson correlation indicates the assessment and content have significant moderate positive relationship on learners’ satisfaction. Findings from this research have implications for instructional technology administrators, distance educational course designers, and instructors who are implementing learning activities in the PPG programme. Keywords: distance education, teaching effectiveness, satisfaction

Introduction Recent years, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of courses offered in an online or distance learning format around the world. In Malaysia, one reason for promoting the open and distance education is due to the perceived inequity between working adults and full-time university students in pursuing their higher education (Raghavan and Kumar, 2008). Initiative of Malaysia Ministry of Education (MOE) to increase the number of teachers who graduated with a bachelor’s degree with total of 50 percent of primary school teachers by 2010 until now has not been achieved. In order to upgrade the professional qualification and status of primary school teachers, the MOE has implemented a specific program, Undergradute Programme for Teachers (Program Pensiswazahan Guru or PPG in Malay language) for primary school teachers to promote from non-graduate teachers become graduate teachers. The programme was implementing in distance education blended learning approach which is combine face-to-face and online learning to enhance the quality of teaching, learning, and management in Malaysian schools (Teacher Education Division, MOE, 2012). Through this programme, the MOE aims to increase the number of teachers who graduated with a bachelor’s degree with approximately 88,000 primary school teachers by 2015. For this regard, MOE has requested Public Higher Education Institutions (IPTA) or Private Higher Education Institutions (IPTS) and Teacher Education Institutes (TEIs) throughout the country to engage in primary schools Graduate Programme for Teachers in order to offer an opportunity of study at the Bachelor level. Fundamentally, the goal of the Graduate Programme for Teachers is to (i) produce graduates in primary education by field of specialization for school subjects to satisfy the requirements of the MOE; (ii) increase the level of professionalism of teachers in the teaching and learning of subjects according to their specialization in schools; (iii) produce teachers who can translate theory into the teaching and learning processes and educational practices that are effective in primary schools; (iv) improve knowledge and skills of primary school teachers to address social issues in education beyond primary school and in the community and (v) continuously strengthen the culture of research in related fields among primary school teachers. The programme has been implemented since 2011 and it has been involved big amount of investment and a numbers of in-service primary school teachers. Hence, it is important to understand the teaching effectiveness of this distance learning management programme as well as learners’ satisfaction toward the programme in order to determine whether or not these program can be replicated in future learning environment. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the perception of the learners toward teaching effectiveness and their satisfactions level of the PPG programme.

1

Research Questions: The primary objective of this study was to answer the following research question: 1. What are PPG learners’ perceptions toward the teaching effectiveness of the PPG program on the aspects of students’ development, assessment, course materials, online component and face-to-face component? 2. What the PPG learners’ satisfaction level toward the distance learning program? 3. Is there a significant relationship between PPG learner’s perceived effectiveness (students’ development, assessment, course materials, online and face-to-face component) and their satisfactions? LITERATURE REVIEW Distance Education Distance education may be defined as “institutionally based formal education where the learning group is separated and where telecommunications technologies are used to connect learners, resources, and instructors” (Simonson, et al. 2003). Distance learning had been evolved from communication between instructor and student by mail, telephone, and computer and to the more sophisticated electronic networks in the 21st Century (Beqiri, Chase & Bishka, 2010; Castle & McGuire, 2010). In generally, distance learning programs are providing access to higher education for students who are unable to attend in a traditional class due to the restriction that make in-person presence challenging or impossible such as employment, distance, marital status, family responsibilities and expenses incurred with traditional education. Several distance learning tertiary institution such as the Open University of Malaysia and the Wawasan Open University had emerged in recent times reflecting the growing importance of distance learning in Malaysia. Teaching Effectiveness of Distance Education Teaching effectiveness is vital element in education because effective teaching enhance students’ learning. It has become even more crucial element as the emphasis on quality in higher education has increased. Cheung, (1998) recommended that evaluation of the teaching effectiveness of distance teaching system should be focus on four aspects: students’ development, assessment, course materials, face-to-face component. Due to the advancement of the latest technology, online education has emerged as an alternative or at least a substantial supplement to traditional manner of teaching and learning (Waits & Lewis, 2004). Hence, a comprehensive evaluation of the teaching effectiveness of distance education courses should be included online component. Below the descriptions of these five dimension will be discussed in detail. Students’ Development Jiang and Ting (2000) report that students' perceived learning was significantly correlated to the percentage of grade weight assigned to involve, and their resulting involvement in discussion. The level of teaching effectiveness is high if the learners are responsive of having knowledge to the subject contents, developed specific skills in the field, and increased motivation in the course (Cheung, 1998). Assessment Effective teaching demands explicit and set up the criteria in detailed on how students’ learning could be assessed fairly. A teacher who encourages a presence of flexibility, empathy and concern will reflect these characteristics in the style of given assessment (Anderson, 2004). Teaching effectiveness is high if students perceived their given tasks or assignments have clear and specific instructions, thoughtfully designed, relevant to the contents and integrated with the subject matters, have high validity and reliability, provide enough time and are assessed fairly (Cheung, 1998). Course Materials Distance education is based on individual learning, but students’ learning is directed and supported by different types of teaching aids. Roberts (1996) study students' perceptions of the relative effectiveness of six different learning processes, found that learning via course materials was the most useful learning process in distance education. Jegede and Kirkwood (1994) reported that content of course

2

materials was one of the main factors affecting students' anxiety in distance learning. Thus, the design and select of course materials needs to consider time and student workload factors. Students will not be interested in studying the provided course materials if must they were overloaded with work. Online Component Online instruction requires instructor to be more efficient and effective in their teaching and to offer students more opportunities to interact with their course materials (Fayne, 2009). Previous studies indicated that knowledge sharing via online component was important because of online discussions enable instructors and students to exchange ideas and comments in anytime at anywhere (Selim, 2005). Skylar (2009) emphasised that synchronous lecturing using web conferencing tools was more engaging students than a text-based lecture. Face to face Component This dimension relates to how students perceive the quality of teaching incorporated in a distance learning programme. Several research studies had indicated the importance of face-to-face interaction (Marold & Haga, 2003) and demonstrated that quality of learning can be achieved by incorporating technology and face-to-face interaction (Kiser, 2002). The effectiveness of this face-to-face component is influenced by instructors’ performance and also institution's arrangements such as size and duration of the class, frequency of lecture, and pleasantness of classroom. Kemp & Grieve (2014) revealed that learners expressed a strong preference for group discussions to be conducted face-to-face as they felt more engaged, more motivated and received more immediate feedback, than in online discussion. Learners’ satisfaction in Distance Education Learning is difficult to measure and the measuring process can’t be directly observable as there are inconsistencies related to teacher’s assigning grades (Issham, Gunasegaran, Koh & Rozhan, (2010). For that reason, learners’ satisfaction on learning always been used as an indicator for learning approach. High satisfaction directs to lower attrition rates, higher persistence, and higher motivation in pursuing online courses. Aman (2009) examined five factors of quality instruction and learners’ satisfaction with each area: 1) outcomes, 2) resource materials, 3) assessment, 4) student interaction, and 5) technology. Findings showed that assessment was a significant factor for overall learners’ satisfaction. Besides that, resource materials such as study directions and guides, additional reading materials has been identified as predictors in learners’ satisfaction. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The study was carried out with quantitative survey approach with a samples of 31 in-service primary school teachers. These teachers were the first cohort non-graduate teachers currently pursuing their degree of Malay Language as first language at semester 7. Of 31 learners in this study, a majority of the participants were female (25, 80.6%). Their age range between 31 and 50 years old with the large percentage (38.7%) were between 31 - 35 years. For the years of teaching experience, the range is between 9 to 26 years. The teaching effectiveness instrument was adapted from Cheung (1998) with teaching effectiveness consisted five dimensions, there are students’ development (6 items), assessment (6 items), course materials (4 items), online component (5 items) and face-to-face component (8 items). While, satisfaction instruments (14 items) was adapted from Bolliger & Halupa (2012). Both the instrument measured on a five-point Likert scale (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree), where higher responses indicated higher levels of agreement. All of the constructs show at least acceptable reliability values, with Cronbach’s α ≥ .70 (Pallant, 2013). Finding and Discussion In order to determine the distance program’s effectiveness and learners’ satisfactions levels, researchers has divided the five-point scale to three levels: High (3.68 – 5.00), Moderate (2.33 – 3.67) and Low (1 - 2.33).

3

Research Question 1: To what extent the distance learners’ perceptions toward the teaching effectiveness of the PPG program from the aspect students’ development, assessment, course materials, online component and face-to-face component? Table 1 : Learners’ Perceived of Teaching Effectiveness in terms of Constructs Teaching Effectiveness 1. Students’ Development 5. Face to Face Component 3. Course materials 2. Assessment 4. Online Component

Minimum 2.47 2.33 2.13 2.00 2.33 1.00

Maximum 4.39 4.33 4.50 4.50 5.00 4.20

Mean 3.66 3.85 3.74 3.72 3.67 3.32

SD .44 .37 .56 .49 .55 .69

Level Moderate High High High High Moderate

This study showed that overall the teaching effectiveness is at the moderate level (M =3.66, SD = .44). The learners reported highest mean for students’ development (3.85, SD = .37)) followed by “face to face component3.74 (sd = .56)., “course materials 3.72 (sd = .55).”, “assessment” is 3.67 (sp = .55) and lastly “online component (3.32, SD =.69)” (see Table 1). Findings indicated the PGG learners perceived that teaching effectiveness in term of students’ development was the most effective component in the program. Result also review the learners showed a preference for face-to-face learning sessions rather than relying merely to the online environment. In term of students development, the learners rate all the 6 items at high level. Item “After the course, I am able to learned to value new viewpoints” yielded the highest mean score (M = 4.06) while item “After the course, I am able to gained a good understanding of concepts, generalizations and theories in this field“ yielded the lowest mean score (M = 3.71). Overall, these results imply that distance learners have high-level perception on students’ development of teaching effectiveness. The scores indicated the mean overall effectiveness in term of assessment which is just right at the upper boundary of moderate level. Of the 6 items, 5 items at high level or above 3.67 while only 1 item at moderate level, that is item “The assignments were assessed fairly” (M = 3.45). Item “The written assignments required a reasonable amount of time yielded the highest mean score (M = 3.77). Student assessment of any kind requires that the teacher be explicit, fair, consistent, and as objective as possible (Anderson, 2004). Moderate level perception on assessment might because some of the learners were not agree the assignments were assessed fairly. For the construct course material, of the 4 items, 2 items at high level and another 2 items at moderate level. Item “The course materials were easy to understand” yielded the highest mean score (M = 3.84) while item “The selected course materials were interesting” yielded the lowest mean score (M = 3.58). Overall, finding showed that distance learners have high level perception on course materials which were used by the instructors. The learners tended to rate all the items in term of online component at moderate level. Item “Submitting my assignments online effective for my learning” yielded the highest mean score (M = 3.52) while item “Learning online without facilitation from an instructor effective for my learning” yielded the lowest mean score (M = 3.13). Results of the study showed that there’s still room for improvement in practising online learning. Yang & Cornelius (2004) found that learners became frustrated when their courses were not well designed. Instructor plays a central role in online learning environment, it’s not merely the content and delivery methods but the feeling of the students themselves should not be neglected. For face to face component, item “The lecturer gave clear and understandable explanations” and “The lecturer was enthusiastic about teaching the course” yielded the highest mean score (M = 3.87) while item “The lecturer encouraged students to ask questions or express opinions” yielded the lowest mean score (M = 3.61). Overall, these results imply that distance learners have high-level perception on face to face component. Previous research found that most students feel that face-to-face interaction is

4

much more important and essential for building a sense of community (Conole et al., 2008). Besides that, instructors’ characteristics such as positive behaviours, facilitation, confidence, knowledge sharing and creativity could motivate learners to engage in distance programme (Salmon, 2000). Research question 2: To what extent the distance learners’ satisfaction level toward the distance program? No. S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14

Table 2: Mean, standard Deviation and level for Satisfaction Satisfaction Mean SD Distance education allows me to work at home comfortably. 3.48 .68 Distance education is worth my time. 3.58 .56 Class assignments were clearly communicated to me. 3.65 .71 The period given by the instructor to prepare assignments are adequate. 3.61 .56 The lecturer makes me feel that I am part of the class and belong. 3.58 .50 I am dissatisfied with the accessibility and availability of the lecturer. 3.23 .72 I am satisfied with the online discussions. 3.32 .54 I am satisfied with how I am able to navigate within Putra LMS. 3.35 .66 I am satisfied with the frequency I have to attend the face to face class. 3.23 .67 I am satisfied with the quality of interaction between all involved parties. 3.48 .63 I am dissatisfied with the collaboration activities during the course. 3.29 .64 I will be satisfied with my final grade in the course. 3.55 .57 Compared to other course settings, I am less satisfied with this learning 3.39 .80 experience. Overall, I am satisfied with this course. 3.77 .50 Overall 3.47 .32

Level Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate

Overall, the respondents’ satisfaction toward the PPG program at moderate level (3.47, SD = .32). Of the 14 items, 13 items at moderate level, while only 1 item at high level. Item “Overall, I am satisfied with this course” yielded the highest mean score (M = 3.77) while item “I am dissatisfied with the accessibility and availability of the lecturer” and “I am satisfied with the frequency I have to attend the face to face class” yielded the lowest mean score (M = 3.23). Less face to face lecture and the availability of the lecturer may decrease students’ satisfaction toward the program. To support and engage students, face-to-face lecture is still the fundamental key and time-honored means for disseminating knowledge. Research Question 3: Is there a significant relationship between PPG learner’s perceived teaching effectiveness (students’ development, assessment, course materials, online component and face-to-face component) and their satisfactions? Table 3: Relationship between teaching effectiveness and satisfactions Students’ Development Assessment .057 .401* Satisfaction Sig(2-tailed) .761 .025 *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Course materials .413* .021

Online .317 .083

F2F .208 .261

The correlation analysis in Table 3 indicated that the component of assessment and course materials was moderate significantly and positively correlated with learner satisfaction (r= .401 and r =.413 respectively). According to Cohen (1988), a correlation of 0.5 is considering large, 0.3 is moderate, and 0.1 is small. The results suggested that the increase of the effectiveness of assessment and course material may increase learner’s satisfaction in certain degree. Similary, Aman (2009), found that assessment and resource materials was a significant factor for learners’ satisfaction. In distance education, the quality of the course materials and the digital learning environment are even more important than for traditional studies. A motivating learning environment with diverse and interactive course materials can improve learners’ success considerably. Limitations Like most studies, this study has several limitations. First, the study was a survey to the 31 PPG learners in UPM. The sample was selected based on the convenience sampling, which may create a

5

selection bias. Second, the focus of current study only in teaching effectiveness as the measurement to the learners ‘satisfaction of PGG distance learning program, it is suggested that future studies consider measures together with effectiveness of technology and other support to gain a comprehensive data. In light of these limitations, the generalizability of the study's results might be limited. Conclusion The findings of this study indicates that (i) PPG learners perceived teaching effectiveness in term of “students’ development” was the most effective component in the programme and following by “face to face component”, “course materials”, “assessment” and lastly “online component”; (ii) PPG learners were moderately satisfied with the course; (iii) the component of assessment and course materials was moderate significantly and positively correlated with learner satisfaction. It’s suggests that careful attention must be paid to the quality of the online component in a distance courses. Curriculums and assessment materials must be developed that equal that of the traditional classroom if distance courses are to receive the respect they deserve. Hopefully the findings obtained can help throw some lights in order to better understand the affordances and constrains in implementing the distance education programme. Results of this study not only can provide practical feedback regarding the PGG learners’ perceptions of the teaching effectiveness and satisfactions of the programme, but also feedforward to improving future course design and implementation. Reference 1. Aman, R. R. (2009). Improving student satisfaction and retention with online instruction through systematic faculty peer review of courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Oregon State University. 2. Anderson, T (2004). Teaching in an Online Learning Context. Athabasca University. http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch11.html 3. Beqiri, M. S., Chase, N. M., & Bishka, A. (2010). Online course delivery: An empirical investigation of factors affecting student satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business, 85(2), 95-100. 4. Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2012). Student perceptions of satisfaction and anxiety in an online doctoral program. Distance Education, 33(1), 81–98. 5. Cheung, D. (1998). Developing a student evaluation instrument for distance teaching. Distance Education, 19, 23–42. 6. Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. 7. Conole G., de Laat M., Dillon T., Darby J. (2008). “Disruptive technologies”, “pedagogical innovation”: what's new? Findings from in-depth study of students' use and perception of technology. Comput. Educ, 50, 511–524. 8. Fayne, H. R. (2009). Using integrated course design to build student communities of practice in a hybrid course. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 128, 53–59. 9. Issham, I. Gunasegaran,T. Koh, P. P. & Rozhan, M. I. (2010). Satisfaction of Distance Learners towards Mobile Learning in Universiti Sains Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 47 - 54. 10. Jegede, O. J., & Kirkwood, J. (1994). Students’ anxiety in learning through distance education. Distance Education, 15(2), 279-290. 11. Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (2000). A Study of Factors Influencing Students' Perceived Learning in a Web-Based Course Environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4). 12. Kemp, N. and Grieve, N. (2014). Face-to-face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates' opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning. Front Psychol. 2014; 5: 1278. 13. Marold, K, & Haga, W. (2003). The emerging profile of the on-line learner: Relating course performance with pretests, GPA, and other measures of achievement. Retrieved from http www findarticles comparticlesmim1254is334ai85465152 14. Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual. 5th ed. USA: Open University Press. 15. Raghavan, S. and P. R. Kumar. (2008). The need for participation in open and distance education: The open university Malaysia experience. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE 9(4). 16. Roberts, D. 1996. Feedback on assignments. Distance Education, 17 (1), 95-116. 17. Selim, H.M. (2005). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers and Education. Retrieved from http://mail.phy.bg.ac.yu/~marijam/milos/science7.pdf 18. Skylar, A. (2009). A Comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues In Teacher Education, 18(2), 69-84. 19. Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M. & Zvacek, S. (2003). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education, 2nd. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

6

20. Waits, T., & Lewis, L. (2004). Distance education at degree granting postsecondary institutions: 200-2001. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_5/5_3/4_4.asp 21. Yang, Y., & Cornelius, L. F. (2004). Students' perceptions towards the quality of online education: A qualitative approach. Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 27, 861–877.

7