7. Comparative and non-comparative evaluation in educational technology

2. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF LEARNER SATISFACTION AND LEARNING OUTCOMES IN ONLINE AND FACE-TO-FACE ENVIRONMENT. EXAMINING SOCIAL PRESENCE IN ONLINE COURSES IN RELATION TO STUDENTS' PERCEIVED LEARNING AND SATISFACTION Comparative Perception and performance studies Non-Comparative

3. Comparative Non-comparative many faculty who are being asked to design and teach Internet-based courses are wondering if students actually learn in these new online environments Research has demonstrated that social presence not only affects outcomes but also student, and possibly instructor, satisfaction with a course. Teacher immediacy behaviors and the presence of others are especially important issues for those involved in delivering online education.

4. Comparative Non-comparative to compare an online course with an equivalent course taught in a traditional face-to-face format in terms of students’ satisfaction and students’ learning outcomes. to explore the role of social presence in online learning environments. More specifically it examined the relationship among students’ perception of social presence in online courses, students’ perceived learning and their satisfaction with the instructor.

6. Comparative Non-comparative Researchers modified 3 instruments to design one instrument that assess interaction, structure and support of the courses. This instrument is called “the Course Interaction, Structure, and Support” ( CISS ) instrument: 1. The university’s Instructor and Course Evaluation System (ICES): 2. Distance and Open Learning Scale (DOLES) 3. Dimensions of Distance Education (DDE) The survey instrument used for this study is based on a social presence scale originally constructed by Gunawardena and Zittle for their research examining social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within computer-mediated conferencing environments. The social presence scale was modified from the original in several ways

7. Comparative Non-comparative Results revealed that the students in the face-to-face course held slightly more positive perceptions about the instructor and overall course quality although there was no difference between the two course formats in several measures of learning outcomes. (NSD) 1. Students Satisfaction: Both groups provided positive ratings, (NSD) 2. Perception of course interaction, structure and support: Overall, both groups of students had positive perceptions, with the face-to-face students having significantly more positive views for interaction and support (NSD) Learning Outcomes: no significance difference revealed. students with high overall perceptions of social presence also scored high in terms of perceived learning and perceived satisfaction with the instructor. Students’ perceptions of social presence overall, moreover, contributed significantly to the predictor equation for students’ perceived learning overall. Gender accounted for some of the variability of students’ overall perception of social presence, while age and number of college credits earned did not account for any of the variability

8. Comparative Non-comparative Using more than one instrument to collect data Social presence not only affects outcomes but also student, and possibly instructor, satisfaction with a course. Support of HDR and ISD expert in students projects ratings. Limited amount of empirical research in social presence area and in online learning makes this study important to the literature.

9. Comparative Non-comparative Research didn’t achieve its goal “to convince teachers using online learning” lack of randomization, manipulation, and control that characterize experimental studies.