Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 63, Issue 2, pp 197–212 | Cite as

Understanding Turkish students’ preferences for distance education depending on financial circumstances: A large-scale CHAID analysis

  • Mehmet Firat
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

In the past, distance education was used as a method to meet the educational needs of citizens with limited options to attend an institution of higher education. Nowadays, it has become irreplaceable in higher education thanks to developments in instructional technology. But the question of why students choose distance education is still important. The purpose of this study was to determine Turkish students’ reasons for choosing distance education and to investigate how these reasons differ depending on their financial circumstances. The author used a Chi squared Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) analysis to determine 18,856 Turkish students’ reasons for choosing distance education. Results of the research revealed that Turkish students chose distance education not because of geographical limitations, family-related problems or economic difficulties, but for such reasons as already being engaged in their profession, increasing their knowledge, and seeking promotion to a better position.

Keywords

Distance education student preferences household income Chi squared Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) analysis 

Résumé

Comprendre la préférence des étudiants turcs pour l’enseignement à distance en fonction de leur situation financière : Une analyse CHAID à grande échelle – Dans le passé, l’enseignement à distance servait à répondre aux besoins éducatifs de citoyens pouvant difficilement fréquenter un établissement d’enseignement supérieur. De nos jours, grâce à l’évolution de la technologie éducative, il est devenu irremplaçable au sein de l’enseignement supérieur. Cependant, il importe toujours de comprendre pourquoi les étudiants choisissent cette méthode d’enseignement. La présente étude visait ainsi à cerner les raisons pour lesquelles des étudiants turcs optent pour l’enseignement à distance et à étudier en quoi ces motivations diffèrent selon leur situation financière. Une analyse à l’aide du détecteur automatique d’interaction fondé sur le test du chi carré (méthode CHAID) a permis de déterminer les raisons pour lesquelles 18 856 étudiants turcs ont choisi l’enseignement à distance. Les résultats de cette recherche ont révélé que ce choix ne s’effectue pas en raison de restrictions géographiques mais parce que les étudiants exercent déjà une profession, souhaitent accroître leurs connaissances ou cherchent à être promus à un meilleur poste.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

In this study, data were collected in 2013 within the scope of four years’ periodical studies on students’ opinions about open and distance education.

References

  1. Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Mabry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(2), 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biggs, D., De Ville, B., & Suen, E. (1991). A method of choosing multi-way partitions for classification and decision trees. Journal of Applied Statistics, 18(1), 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Reeves, T. C., & Reynolds, T. H. (Eds) (2015). MOOCs and open education around the world. Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bray, N. J., Harris, M. S., & Major, C. (2007). New verse or the same old chorus? Looking holistically at distance education research. Research in Higher Education, 48(7), 889–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dudley, W. N., Dilorio, C., & Soet, J. (2000). Detecting and explicating interactions in categorical data. Nursing Research, 49(1), 53–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fırat, M. (2012). Determination of educators’ radical and transformative approaches on the future of schools. Journal of Future Education, 1(2), 15–30.Google Scholar
  7. Firat, M. (2016). Measuring the e-learning autonomy of distance education students. Open Praxis, 8(3), 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flinck, R. (1979). The research project on two-way communication in distance education: An overview. Epistolodidactica, 1–2, 3–10.Google Scholar
  9. Garrison, D. R. (1987). Researching dropout in distance education. Distance Education, 8(1), 95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gilbert, S. W. (1995). Why distance education?. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin., 48, 3–4.Google Scholar
  11. Holmberg, B. (2005). Theory and practice of distance education. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Horner, B. S., Fireman, D. G., & ve Wang, W. E. (2010). The relation of student behavior, peer status, race and gender to decisions about school discipline using CHAID decision trees and regression modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48(2), 135–161.Google Scholar
  13. Jahng, N., Krug, D., & Zhang, Z. (2007). Student achievement in online distance education compared to face-to-face education. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 10(1), article 253 [online]. Retrieved 13 October 2016 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2007/Jahng_Krug_Zhang.pdf.
  14. Kass, G. V. (1980). An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Applied Statistics, 29(2), 119–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kayri, M., & Boysan, M. (2007). Using chaid analysis in researches and an application pertaining to coping strategies. Ankara University, Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 40(2), 133–149.Google Scholar
  16. Kearsley, G. (2017). Andragogy (M. Knowles). In Explorations in learning & instruction: The theory into practice database [online resource]. Retrieved 21 February 2017 from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/andragogy.html.
  17. Leach, R., & Webb, R. (1993). Opportunities through open learning. In J. Calder (Ed.), Disaffection and diversity: Overcoming barriers for adult learners (pp. 91–109). London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  18. Li, F., Zhou, M., & Fan, B. (2014). Can distance education increase educational equality? Evidence from the expansion of Chinese higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1811–1822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu, O. L. (2012). Student evaluation of instruction: In the new paradigm of distance education. Research in Higher Education, 53(4), 471–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Michael, J., & Gordon, S. (2004). Data mining technique for marketing, sales and customer support (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley Computer Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Medel-Añonuevo, C., Ohsako, T., & Mauch, W. (2001). Revisiting Lifelong Learning for the 21st Century. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education.Google Scholar
  22. Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  23. Mupinga, D. M. (2005). Distance education in high schools: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 78(3), 105–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nichols, M. (2010). Student perceptions of support services and the influence of targeted interventions on retention in distance education. Distance Education, 31(1), 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ohler, J. (1991). Why distance education? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 514(1), 22–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pop, A. (2016). 5 important criteria to choose a distance learning programme [online article]. Distancelearningportal, 6 March. Retrieved 13 October 2016 from http://www.distancelearningportal.com/articles/366/5-important-criteria-to-choose-a-distance-learning-programme.html?attempt=1.
  27. Robinson, R. (1992). Andragogy applied to the open college learner. Research in Distance Education, 4(1), 10–13.Google Scholar
  28. Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sweet, R. (1986). Student dropout in distance education: An application of Tinto’s model. Distance Education, 7(2), 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tansel, A., & Bodur, F. B. (2012). Wage inequality and returns to education in Turkey: A quantile regression analysis. Review of Development Economics, 16(1), 107–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tait, A. (2000). Planning student support for open and distance learning. Open Learning, 15(3), 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Türk-İş (2013). Açlık ve Yoksulluk Sınırı Araştırması, Eylül 2013 [Poverty Limit Survey, 2013]. Ankara: Türkiye İşçi Sendikaları Konfederasyonu.Google Scholar
  33. Wallace, L. (2007). Changes in the demographics and motivations of distance education students. International Journal of e-Learning & Distance Education, 11(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
  34. Winograd, K. (2002). ABCs of the virtual high school. The Technology Source, March/April. Retrieved 21 August 2016 from http://www.technologysource.org/article/abcs_of_the_virtual_high_school/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Distance Education, Open Education FacultyAnadolu UniversityEskisehirTurkey

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options