University Students` Satisfaction: The Impact of Computer-mediated Blended Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/186Keywords:
student satisfaction, blended learning, e-learning, correctional officer training, probation officer training, parole officer training, SUSSAbstract
Penitentiary systems in transition countries are in a state of reform. This factor imposes additional difficulties in the vocational training of future probation and correctional officers. Improving the process of their instruction at universities should consider the condition of their satisfaction and efficiency of modern educational technologies. During the experiment, the online intranet course was implemented in the educational process. This course oriented to the stimulation of students` emotional-motivational states, facilitation of cognitive abilities and using of practice-oriented educational exercises for autonomous learning. The student satisfaction was measured with SUSS – the Students University Satisfaction Scale (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient α=0.90). At the end of the experiment, t-test (with independent samples) displayed that students of the experimental group (n=82) had significantly higher scores for students` satisfaction than the students of the control group (n=82, t=4.24), especially satisfaction with curriculum (t=7.78), teaching and learning (t=7.65). The results of the study confirm the effectiveness of blended learning, in particular, the Station-Rotation model, to increase students' motivation and satisfaction. Practical implications include the implementation of online courses in basic academic disciplines in the training of Ukrainian probation and correctional officers. Instructional Design Implications include further study of the realized techniques, methods and models of blended learning.References
The European Court Of Human Rights (2018). ECHR in facts & figures 2018. Available from: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Facts_Figures_2018_ENG.p df
UNESCO (1998). World declaration on higher education for the twenty‐first century: Vision and action. In World Conference on Higher Education. Ginebra: Unesco. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/declaration_eng .htm
Aldridge, M. (1999). Probation officer training, promotional culture and the public sphere. Public Administration, 77(1): 73-90.
Aleksieiev, O. M., Korotun, M. M., & Trebukhov, D. V. (2018). The use of animation as a means to increase motivation among students of engineering disciplines. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 65(3):76-90.
Balendr, A. V., Komarnytska, O. I., Bloshchynskyi, I. H., & Didenko, O. V. (2018). Information and communication technologies in foreign languages training of the border guards in the European Union Countries. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 67(5):56-71.
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22: 1-18.
Bolliger, D. U. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-learning, 3(1):61-67.
Bonta, J., Bourgon, G., Rugge, T., Scott, T. L., Yessine, A. K., Gutierrez, L., & Li, J. (2011). An experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based community supervision. Criminal justice and behavior, 38(11), 1127-1148.
Carter, D. (1991). The status of education and training in corrections. Fed. Probation, 55, 17. Castle, T. L. (2008). Satisfied in the jail? Exploring the predictors of job satisfaction among jail officers. Criminal Justice Review, 33(1), 48-63.
Cole, M. T., Shelley, D. J., & Swartz, L. B. (2014). Online instruction, elearning, and student satisfaction: A three year study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(6). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1748
Danysko, O. V., & Semenovska, L. A. (2018). Genesis and modern content of blended learning concept in foreign pedagogical theory and practice. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 65(3):1-11.
Davies, K., & Durrance, P. (2009). Probation training: the experience of learners and teachers. Social Work Education, 28(2), 204-221.
Davies, K. (2011). Work-based distance learning for probation practice: Doing the job properly. Probation Journal, 58(1), 68-73.
Dominey, J. (2010). Work-based distance learning for probation practice: Doing the job properly. Probation Journal, 57(2), 153-162.
Eskridge, C. W. (1979). Education and training of probation officers: A critical assessment. Fed. Probation, 43, 41.
Fredericksen, E., Swan, K., Pelz, W., Pickett, A., & Shea, P. (1999). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses-principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, (September 2000), 4 (2):7-41.
Graham, C.R. (2006) Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In: Bonk, C.J. and Graham, C.R., Eds., Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, Pfeiffer Publishing, San Francisco, 3-21.
Grayson, J. P. (2004). The Relationship Between Grades and Academic Program Satisfaction Over Four Years of Study. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 34(2):1-34.
Hanna, D. E., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Runlee, S. (2000). 147 practical tips for teaching online groups. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Horn, H., Staker, H. (2015). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hussain, N., & Bhamani, S. (2012a). Development of the student university satisfaction scale: reliability and validity. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(3):332-341.
Hussain, N., & Bhamani, S. (2012b). Investigating Academic Satisfaction of Students in Business Schools of Pakistan. International Symposium on Education, Psychology and Social Sciences Conference Proceedings. Kuala Lumpur 2012.(pp. 101-121)
Karchevskyi, M. V. (2017). Positive experience of using technologies of distant education. Scientific Herald of Sivershchtna / Series: Law 2 (2): 142.
Kizim, S. S. (2018). Peculiarities of would-be teachers’professional training with electronic educational resources. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 65(3):115-132.
Knight, C., & Stout, B. (2009). Probation and offender manager training: An argument for an integrated approach. Probation Journal, 56(3), 269- 283.
Krsmanovic, M., Djuric, M., & Dmitrovic, V. (2012). A Survey of Student Satisfaction with Distance Learning at Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade. In International Conference on Virtual and Networked Organizations, Emergent Technologies, and Tools 248, 111- 117. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Lambert, E. G., & Paoline, E. A. (2008). The influence of individual, job, and organizational characteristics on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Criminal Justice Review, 33(4), 541-564.
Lambert, E., & Paoline III, E. A. (2010). Take this job and shove it: An exploratory study of turnover intent among jail staff. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(2), 139-148.
Layman, C.E. (2015) Benefits of e-learning for Maryland parole and probation agents. [online] Available from: http://www.academia.edu/
Leeds, C. M. (1951). Probation work requires special training. Fed. Probation, 15, 25.
Leip, L. A., & Stinchcomb, J. B. (2013). Should I stay or should I go? Job satisfaction and turnover intent of jail staff throughout the United States. Criminal Justice Review, 38(2):226-241.
Liashenko, I., & Hnapovska, L. (2019). Blended Education: Patterns of Implementation at Sumy State University. Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 11(3):141-162
Lowenkamp, C. T., Holsinger, A. M., Flores, A. W., & Koutsenok, I. (2013). Changing probation officer attitudes: Training experience, motivation, and knowledge. Fed. Probation, 77, 54.
Ma'arop, A. H., & Embi, M. A. (2016). Implementation of blended learning in higher learning institutions: A review of the literature. International Education Studies, 9(3): 41-52.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A system view Belmont. Wadsworth, CA.
Navarro, P. (2000). The promise—and potential pitfalls—of cyberlearning. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 281-296). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Oliynik, V. V., Samoylenko, O. M., Batsurovs’ka, I. V., & Dotsenko, N. A. (2018). Formation of future agricultural engineers professional competences in computer-oriented environment of higher education institutions. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 68(6):140-154.
Palmer, S. R., & Holt, D. M. (2009). Examining student satisfaction with wholly online learning. Journal of computer assisted learning, 25(2):101- 113.
Pekarchuk, V., Valieiev, R., & Zozulia, Y. (2018). Professional Motivation and Job Satisfaction of Personnel of State Penitentiary Service of Ukraine. Наука і освіта, (3), 43-53.
Pike, G. R. (1991). The effects of background, coursework, and involvement on students' grades and satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 32(1), 15-30.
Sharp, L. J. (1951). Inservice training in probation and parole. Fed. Probation, 15, 25.
Skinner, C., & Goldhill, R. (2013). Changes in probation training in England and Wales: The Probation Qualification Framework (PQF) three years on. European Journal of Probation, 5(3): 41-55.
Solinas, G., Masia, M. D., Maida, G., & Muresu, E. (2012). What really affects student satisfaction? An assessment of quality through a university-wide student survey. Creative Education, 3(1):37.
Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute, 8-9, Available from: http://www.innosightinstitute.org/innosight/wpcontent/uploads/2012/05/Classifying-K-12-blended-learning2.pdf
Strachota, E. (2006, October). The use of survey research to measure student satisfaction in online courses. In Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis, MO.
Treadwell, J. (2006). Some personal reflections on probation training. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 45(1): 1-13.
Valieiev, R. (2013). The Formation of Cognitive Autonomy of Cadets of the System of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine by means of information technology. PhD dissertation. Ukraine: Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University.
Vernadakis, N., Giannousi, M., Tsitskari, E., Antoniou, P., & Kioumourtzoglou, S. (2012). Comparison of student satisfaction between traditional and blended technology course offerings in Physical education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(1):137-147.
Wang, Y., Han, X., & Yang, J. (2015). Revisiting the blended learning literature: Using a complex adaptive systems framework. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2): 380-393.
Hlynsky, Ya., Ryazhska, V. (2016). Development of the EEVR for the distance learning and distance education courses, on the 8th Scientific Conf. Innovative computer technologies in higher education, Lviv, 2016, p. 194-200.
Zhao, Y., & Breslow, L. (2013). Literature review on hybrid/blended learning. Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Available from: https://tll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/library/Blended_Learning_Lit _Reveiw.pdf
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant this journalright 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.
- 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.
- 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 an earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala Journal has an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
CC BY-NC-ND