THE PEDAGOGY-DRIVEN, LEARNER-CENTRED, OBJECTIVE-ORIENTED AND TECHNOLOGY-ENABLE (PLOT) ONLINE LEARNING MODEL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2018.22.6680Keywords:
Online Learning, PLOT Model, Educational Technology, PedagogyAbstract
Online learning changes the ways of learning. Learning has been shifted from traditional face-to-face teacher-student knowledge transfer to online learning with diversified learning pattern. To understand the learning experiences of online learning, a qualitative study with in-depth interview was conducted. The data was analysed by developing the thematic maps for thematic analysis. The final four themes categorized were pedagogy, learning, objective and technology. With the identified themes, the learning experiences of online learning were explored. An important finding was that the role of technology became more important and the role of teacher became less prominent. With the advanced technology which enabled diversified learning in the online environment, it was inevitable that some roles of teaching have been shifted from the teacher to the system. However, the role of technology cannot be truly reflected in the current online learning models. In this paper, the importance of pedagogical-driven element is again proven. Furthermore, the element of technical-enabled is found as essential in contemporary online learning. As a result, a new online learning model, Pedagogy-driven, Learner-Centred, Objective-Oriented, Technology-Enabled (PLOT) model, was proposed, as a model for contemporary online learning.
References
Alkhalidi, A., & Izani, M. (2017). Assisting Interior Design Class Using Online 3D Application. International Journal of Social Science, 3(3), 124-132. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.33.124132
Braun V. & Clarke V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun V. & Wilkinson S. (2003). Liability or Asset? Women Talk about The Vagina. Psychology of Women Section Review, 5, 28-42.
Chuang, Y. T. (2015). SSCLS: A Smartphone-Supported Collaborative System. Telematics and Informatics, 32(3), 463-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.10.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.10.004
Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G. (2001). Development of a Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale for Nursing Education. Nurse Education Today, 21, 516-525. https://doi.org/10.1054/nedt.2001.0589
Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 11(4), 395-429. https://doi.org/10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG
Khan, B. H. (2005). Managing e-learning: Design, delivery, implementation, and evaluation. US: Information Science Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-634-1
Kim, S., Park, I., Yang, M., Lee, A., & Kang, S. (2017). Development of an Educational Online Game for the Intervention of Korean Dyslexia – A Game Utilising Syllable Counting for Phonological Awareness Intervention. International Journal of Social Science, 2(2), 2544-2550.
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York: Cambridge Adult Education.
Lam, J. (2014). The context of blended learning: The TIPS blended learning model. In S. Cheung, J. Fong, J. Zhang, R. Kwan & L. F. Kwok (Eds.), Hybrid learning: Theory and practice (pp. 80-92). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08961-4_9
Lam, J., Hung, A., Chan, F. T., Zhang, W. Y., Yan, K. & Woo, G. (2011). Blended Learning Course Development Model. In V. Lee, F. L. Wang, S. Cheung & A. Hung (Eds.), Blended learning: Maximization of teaching and learning effectiveness (pp. 52-64). HK: City University of Hong Kong.
Levin, J. A., Kim, H., & Riel, M. M. (1990). Analyzing Instructional Interactions on Electronic Message Networks. In Harasim, L. (Ed.) Online Education (185-213), New York: Praeger.
Loveless, A. (2011). Technology, Pedagogy and Education: Reflections on the Accomplishment of What Teachers Know, Do and Believe in a Digital Age. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(3), 301-316. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2011.610931
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three Types of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 3(2), 1-7. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence and computer conferencing in distance education, America Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
Picciano, A. G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 7-18.
Richter, S. (2013). Article review: The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks.https://eddinit.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/article-review-the-challenges-to-connectivist-learning-on-open-online-networks/
Salleh, N. B. M. (2016). Maximizing Students' Learning Experience through Differentiated Instructions in an ICT Integrated Environment. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 1401-1409.
Wang, N. & Qiao, A. (2009). On the Nature and Underlying Theories of Online Learning Activities. Distance Education in China, 1, 36-40.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of Published Articles
Author(s) retain the article copyright and publishing rights without any restrictions.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
