Scaffolding learner autonomy in online university courses

  1. Elisa Ribbe 1
  2. María-José Bezanilla 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Deusto
    info

    Universidad de Deusto

    Bilbao, España

    ROR https://ror.org/00ne6sr39

Revista:
Digital Education Review

ISSN: 2013-9144

Año de publicación: 2013

Número: 24

Páginas: 98-112

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Digital Education Review

Resumen

This paper deals with the question in what ways teachers and course designers can support the development and exertion of learner autonomy among online university students. It advocates that a greater attention to learner autonomy could help more students to complete their course successfully and thus contribute the decrease of the high dropout rates in e-learning. To illustrate this position, the paper defines three principles of scaffolding learner autonomy and discusses them in relation to the specific challenges of e-learning settings. Drawing on relevant literature on course design, as result the paper presents exemplary design aspects that can serve the scaffolding of learner autonomy.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. M. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2-3), 82–103.
  • Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40, 21-40.
  • Bezanilla, M. J. (2008). Las TIC como apoyo a los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje en el nuevo marco de Bolonia. IV Jornadas Universitarias de Innovación y Calidad; Buenas Prácticas Académicas . Publicación en CD-ROM.
  • Boud, D. & Prosser, M. (2002). Appraising New Technologies for Learning: A Framework for Development. Educational Media International, 39 (3-4), 237-245.
  • Borges, F. (2007). The virtual environment student: An initial approximation. Digithum, (9), 3–9.
  • Dobrovolny, J. (2006). How Adults Learn from Self-Paced, Technology-Based Corporate Training: New focus for learners, new focus for designers. Distance Education, 27(2), 155 170.
  • Fernández March, A. (2010). La evaluación orientada al aprendizaje en un modelo de formación por competencias en la educación universitaria. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 8(1), 11-34.
  • Frankola, K. (2001). Why Online Learners Drop Out. Workforce, 80(10), 53–58.
  • Gunawardena, C. N., Ortegano-Layne, L., Carabajal, K., Frechette, C. Lindermann, K. & Jennings, B. (2006). New Model, New Strategies: Instructional design for building online wisdom communities. Distance Education, 27(2), 217 232.
  • Hagel, P. & Shaw, R. N. (2006). Students' Perceptions of Study Modes. Distance Education, 27(3), 282 302.
  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C. & Oliver, R. (2006). Authentic Tasks Online: A synergy among learner, task and technology. Distance Education, 27(2), 233 247.
  • Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning: Prepared for the Council of Europe. Oxford: Pergamon.
  • Hui, F. & Koplin, M. (2011). The implementation of authentic activities for learning: a case study in finance education. e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 5(1), 59-72.
  • Koszalka, T. A. & Ganesan, R. (2004). Designing Online Courses: A taxonomy to guide strategic use of features available in course management systems (CMS) in distance education. Distance Education, 25(2), 243 256.
  • Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011). A review of online course dropout research: implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(5), 593–618.
  • Lewis, T., & Vialleton, E. (2011). The notions of control and consciousness in learner autonomy and selfregulated learning: a comparison and critique. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 205–219.
  • Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: The dependence of learner autonomy on teacher autonomy. System, 23(2), 175–181.
  • Little, D. (2004). Constructing a theory of learner autonomy: some steps along the way. In K. Mäkinen, P. Kaikkonen, & V. Kohonen (Eds.), Future Perspectives in Foreign Language Education (pp. 15–25). Oulu.
  • Little, D. (20–2012, September 22). Two views of learner autonomy and their implications for applied linguistics research. XXXVII. FAAPI Conference. San Martin de los Andes.
  • Ludwig-Hardman, S., & Dunlap, J. C. (2003). Learner Support Services for Online Students : Scaffolding for success. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(1), 1–15.
  • Lynch, R. & Dembo, M. (2004). The Relationship between Self-Regulation and Online Learning in a Blended Learning Context. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1-16.
  • McLoughlin, C. (2002). Learner Support in Distance and Networked Learning Environments: Ten Dimensions for Successful Design. Distance Education, (23)2, 149 162.
  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
  • Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors Influencing Adult Learners' Decision to Drop Out or Persist in Online Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207–217.
  • Parker, J., Maor, D. & Herrington, J. (2013). Authentic online learning: Aligning learner needs, pedagogy and technology. Issues in Educational Research, 23(2), 227-241.
  • Paul, R. (1990). Towards a new measure of success: Developing independent learners. Open Learning, 5(1), 31–38.
  • Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a community of inquiry in online and blended learmning environments. Computers & Education, 55, 1721-1731.
  • Summer, T. (2010). Key Concept: Learner Autonomy. profil Würzburger Zeitschrift für universitären Fremdsprachenunterricht, (2), 7–10.
  • Vonderwell, S., Liang, X. & Alderman, K. (2007). Asynchronous Discussions and Assessment in Online Learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 309-328.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1967). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • White, C. (1995). Autonomy and strategy use in distance foreign language learning: research findings. System, 23(2), 207–221.
  • White, C. (2005). Contribution of Distance Education to the Development of Individual Learners. Distance Education, 26(2), 165 181.
  • Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students' decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115–127.
  • Woo, Y., Herrington, J., Agostinho, S. & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Implementing Authentic Tasks in Web-Based Learning Environments. Educause Quarterly, 3, 36-43.
  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A Social Cognitive View of Self-Regulated Academic Learning. Journal of Educational Policy, 81(3), 329–339.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet