Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Saggi e ricerche

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2020): Docenti, sviluppo professionale e didattica: riflessioni sulle nuove sfide per l'insegnamento e l'apprendimento

Interactions e-tutors-students and evaluation performances: A data analysis in online higher education

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/exioa2-2020oa10810
Submitted
dicembre 1, 2020
Published
2020-12-01

Abstract

The article presents a quantitative data analysis in the setting of online university teaching. The research assumed a positive correlation between the intensity of the interaction among e-tutor and students correlated with the final evaluation. The analysis involved 248 students and considered 2845 interactions. The data showed a weakly negative correlation, thus falsifying the starting hypothesis. This preliminary work highlighted some points of attention already known in the reference literature with respect to the predictive capabilities of data analysis for the research on learning activities: 1) quality and integration of the data analyzed; 2) attribution of a pedagogical sense to the results of the analysis.

References

  1. Bates, T. (2008). Transforming distance education through new technologies. In T. Evan, M. Haughey, & D. Murphy (Eds.). International handbook of distance education. Bingley: Emerald Group. Doi: 10.1108/09504120911003267.
  2. Bennet, S., Marsh, D. (2002). Are we expecting online tutors to run before they can walk?. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(1), 14-20. Doi: 10.1080/13558000110097055.
  3. Chang, C., Shen, H., Liu, E. Z. (2014). University faculties’ perspectives on the roles of e-instructors and their online instruction practice. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(3), 72-92. Doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i3.1654.
  4. Chatti, M. A., Muslim, A., & Schroeder, U. (2017). Toward an open learning analytics ecosystem. In Big data and learning analytics in higher education (pp. 195-219). Springer, Cham. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-06520-5_12.
  5. De Metz, N., Bezuidenhout, A. (2018) An importance – competence analysis of the roles and competencies of e-tutors at an open distance learning institution. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(5) 27-43. Doi: 10.14742/ajet.3364.
  6. Drachsler, H., Greller, W. (2016). Privacy and analytics: it’s a DELICATE issue a checklist for trusted learning analytics. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 89-98). Doi: 10.1145/2883851.2883893.
  7. Goold, A., Coldwell, J., & Craig, A. (2010). An examination of the role of the e-tutor. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(5), 704-716. Doi: 10.14742/ajet.1060.
  8. Gursoy, M. E., Inan, A., Nergiz, M. E., Saygin, Y. (2016). Privacy-preserving learning analytics: challenges and techniques. IEEE Transactions on Learning technologies, 10(1), 68-81. Doi: 10.1109/tlt.2016.2607747.
  9. Ferguson, R. (2019). Ethical challenges for learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(3), 25-30. Doi: 10.18608/jla.2019.63.5.
  10. Heuel, E., Feldmann B. (2014). Quality standards for e-learning in vocational education and training: The certified European e-tutor. In Uden, L., Tao, Y.H., Yang, H.C., Ting, I.H. (Eds.). The 2nd International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Dordrecht: Springer. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7308-0_10.
  11. Horner, G., Gouws, P. (2016) E-tutoring support for undergraduate students learning computer programming at the University of South Africa. Computer Science Education Research Conference 2016, Pretoria, South Africa. Doi: 10.1145/2998551.2998557.
  12. Huertas Hildago, E., Marcos, S., Kuhn, M.R., Seppmann, G. (2018). Considerations for quality assurance of e-learning provision, Report from the ENQA Working Group VIII on quality assurance and e-learning, ENQA.
  13. Maré, S., Mutezo, A. T. (2020). The effectiveness of e-tutoring in an open and distance e-learning environment: evidence from the university of south africa. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 1-17. Doi: 10.1080/02680513.2020.1717941.
  14. Matoane, M., Mashile, E.O. (2013). Key considerations for successful e-tutoring: lessons learnt from an institution of higher learning in South Africa. E-Learn: World Conference on E-learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. Las Vegas, NV, USA.
  15. Ngubane-Mokiwa, S.A. (2017). Implications of the University of South Africa’s shift to Open Distance e-Learning on teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 42(9), 111-124. Doi: 10.14221/ajte.2017v42n9.7.
  16. Pardo, A., Siemens, G. (2014). Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 438-450. Doi: 10.1111/bjet.12152.
  17. Queiros, A., Faria, D., Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(9), 369-387.
  18. Ramorola, M.Z. (2018) The roles and responsibilities of e-tutors in open distance and e-learning environment. South Africa International Conference on Educational Technologies 2018.
  19. Salmon, G. (2003). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London: Routledge Falmer.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...