Advertisement

Journal of Computers in Education

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 253–272 | Cite as

An integrated learning styles and scientific investigation-based personalized web approach: a result on conceptual learning achievements and perceptions of high school students

  • Patcharin Panjaburee
  • Niwat SrisawasdiEmail author
Article

Abstract

The advancement of computers and communication technologies has encouraged an increasing number of studies concerning personalized web-based learning, in which students are able to learn in individual learning instruction; in particular, the students can receive formatted learning material associated with their learning preference. Although such an approach seems interesting to the students, researchers have emphasized the need for well-designed instruction in order to improve the students’ learning achievements. Therefore, it has become an important issue to employ art of teaching to assist the students to learn in a personalized web-based learning environment. Based on this perspective, this study proposes an integrated learning styles and scientific investigation-based approach for improving the learning achievements of students in a personalized web-based learning environment. A personalized web-based learning environment has been developed based on this approach, and an experiment on a physics course has been conducted in northeastern Thailand to evaluate its effectiveness. The experimental results show that the proposed approach improves the students’ learning achievement. Moreover, the students had positive perceptions toward the personalized web-based learning based on the proposed approach.

Keywords

Teaching and learning strategies Interactive learning environments Web-based learning Applications in science areas 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research project is supported by Mahidol University under Grant Numbers 67/2557 and 103/2558. The development of PhET interactive science simulation in Thai version is supported by the Office for Educational Technology Development Fund, Ministry of Education (MOE), Thailand.

References

  1. Akbulut, Y., & Cardak, C. S. (2012). Adaptive educational hypermedia accommodating learning styles: Content analysis of publications from 2000 to 2011. Computers and Education, 58(2), 835–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bai, S. M., & Chen, S. M. (2008). Automatically constructing concept maps based on fuzzy rules for adapting learning systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 35, 41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng, G. (2014). Exploring students’ learning styles in relation to their acceptance and attitudes towards using Second Life in education: Acase study in Hong Kong. Computers and Education, 70, 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng, S. Y., Lin, C. S., Chen, H. H., & Heh, J. S. (2005). Learning and diagnosis of individual and class conceptual perspectives: An intelligent systems approach using clustering techniques. Computers and Education, 44, 257–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chookaew, S., Panjaburee, P., Wanichsan, D., & Laosinchai, P. (2014). A personalized e-learning environment to promote student’s conceptual learning on basic computer programming. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(21), 815–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chookaew, S., Wanichsan, D., Hwang, G.-J., & Panjaburee, P. (2015). Effects of a personalised ubiquitous learning support system on university students’ learning performance and attitudes in computer-programming courses. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 9(3), 240–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins, A. (1990). The role of computer technology in restructuring schools. In K. Sheingold & M. S. Tucker (Eds.), Restructuring for learning with technology (pp. 29–46). New York: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College and the National Center on Education and the Economy.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. E. (1984). Productivity environmental preference survey. Lawrence: Price Systems.Google Scholar
  11. Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 78(7), 674–681.Google Scholar
  12. Felder, R. M., & Spurlin, J. E. (2005). A validation study of the index of learning styles. Applications, reliability, and validity of the index of learning styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103–112. From http://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html.
  13. Graf, S., Lin, T., & Kinshuk, (2007). The relationship between learning styles and cognitive traits–Getting additional information for improving student modelling. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 122–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huang, E. Y., Lin, S. W., & Huang, T. K. (2012). What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage instruction. Computers and Education, 58(1), 338–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hwang, G. J. (2003). A conceptual map model for developing intelligent tutoring systems. Computers and Education, 40, 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hwang, G.-J., & Chang, H. F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers and Education, 56(4), 1023–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hwang, G. J., Panjaburee, P., Shih, B. Y., & Triampo, W. (2013a). A group decision approach to developing concept effect models for diagnosing student learning problems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 453–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hwang, G. J., Sung, H. Y., Hung, C. M., & Huang, I. (2013b). A learning style perspective to investigate the necessity of developing adaptive learning systems. Educational Technology and Society, 16(2), 188–197.Google Scholar
  19. Hwang, G. J., Sung, H. Y., Hung, C. M., Huang, I., & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Development of a personalized educational computer game based on students’ learning styles. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 623–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaburlasos, V. G., Marinagi, C. C., & Tsoukalas, V. T. (2008). Personalized multi-student improvement based on Bayesian cybernetics. Computers and Education, 51, 1430–1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keefe, J. W. (1987). Learning styles: Theory and practice. Reston: National Association of Secondary School Principals.Google Scholar
  22. Keefe, J. W. (1991). Learning style: Cognitive and thinking skills. Reston: National Association of Secondary School Principals.Google Scholar
  23. Klasnja-Milićević, A., Vesin, B., Ivanović, M., & Budimac, Z. (2011). E-Learning personalization based on hybrid recommendation strategy and learning style identification. Computers and Education, 56(3), 558–899.Google Scholar
  24. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experimental learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Enlewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  25. Kolb, D. A., Osland, J. S., & Rubin, I. M. (1995). Organization behaviour (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prince-Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Kollöffel, B. (2012). Exploring the relation between visualizer–verbalizer cognitive styles and performance with visual or verbal learning material. Computer and Education, 58(2), 697–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kubicek, P. J. (2005). Inquiry-based learning, the nature of science, and computer technology: New possibilities in science education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(1). Available at http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/149/142. Accessed 22 April 2014.
  28. Kuhn, D., Black, J. B., Kesselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuljis, J., & Liu, F. (2005). A comparison of learning style theories on the suitability for elearning. In M. H. Hamza (Ed.), Proceedings of the IASTED conference on web-technologies, applications, and services (pp. 191–197). Calgary: ACTA Press.Google Scholar
  30. Litzinger, T., Lee, S. H., Wise, J. C., & Felder, R. M. (2007). A psychometric study of the index of learning styles. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Magoulas, G., Papanikolaou, K., & Grigoriadou, M. (2003). Adaptive web-based learning: Accommodating individual differences through system’s adaptation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 511–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mampadi, F., Chen, S. Y., Ghinea, G., & Chen, M.-P. (2011). Design of adaptive hypermedia learning systems: A cognitive style approach. Computers and Education, 56(4), 1003–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  34. Panjaburee, P., Hwang, G. J., Triampo, W., & Shih, B. Y. (2010). A multi-expert approach for developing testing and diagnostic systems based on the concept-effect model. Computers and Education, 55(2), 527–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Panjaburee, P. & Srisawasdi, N. (2013a). Criteria and strategies for applying concept-effect relationship model in technological personalized learning environment. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computers in Education 2013. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, Indonesia.Google Scholar
  36. Panjaburee, P. & Srisawasdi, N. (2013b). Guideline for the development of personalized technology-enhanced learning in science, technology, and mathematics education. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computers in Education 2013. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, Indonesia.Google Scholar
  37. Papanikolaou, K. A., Grigoriadou, M., Magoulas, G. D., & Kornilakis, H. (2002). Towards new forms of knowledge communication: The adaptive dimension of a web-based learning environment. Computers and Education, 39, 333–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Papanikolaou, K. A., Mabbott, A., Bull, S., & Grigoriadou, M. (2006). Designing learner-controlled educational interactions based on learning/cognitive style and learner behaviour. Interacting with Computers, 18, 356–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Popescu, E. (2010). Adaptation provisioning with respect to learning styles in a Web-based educational system: An experimental study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(4), 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Srisawasdi, N. (2012). Introducing students to authentic inquiry investigation by using an artificial olfactory system. In K. C. D. Tan, M. Kim, & S. W. Hwang (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research: Moving forward. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Srisawasdi, N., & Kroothkeaw, S. (2014). Supporting students’ conceptual learning and retention of light refraction concepts by simulation-based inquiry with dual-situated learning model. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(1), 49–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Srisawasdi, N., & Panjaburee, P. (2014). Technology-enhanced Learning in science, technology, and mathematics education: Results on supporting student learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(21), 946–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Srisawasdi, N. & Panjaburee, P. (2015). Personal learning activity approach for developing adaptive web-based learning systems. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computers in Education. China: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.Google Scholar
  44. Srisawasdi, N., Srikasee, S., & Panjaburee, P. (2012). Development of a constructivist web-based learning system with student personalized conceptual profile. Proceeding from the 20th International Conference on Computers in Education. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, Singapore.Google Scholar
  45. Steffe, L., & Gale, J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers and Education, 52(2), 302–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tseng, J. C. R., Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2008a). Development of an adaptive learning system with two sources of personalization information. Computers and Education, 51(2), 776–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tseng, S. S., Su, J. M., Hwang, G. J., Hwang, G. H., Tsai, C. C., & Tsai, C. J. (2008b). An object-oriented course framework for developing adaptive learning systems. Educational Technology and Society, 11(2), 171–191.Google Scholar
  49. von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wanichsan, D., Panjaburee, P., Laosinchai, P., Triampo, W., & Chookaew, S. (2012). A majority-density approach to developing testing and diagnostic systems with the cooperation of multiple experts based on an enhanced concept-effect relationship model. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(9), 8380–8388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wenning, C. J. (2005). Levels of inquiry: Hierarchies of pedagogical practices and inquiry processes. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 2(3), 3–11.Google Scholar
  52. Wenning, C. J. (2010). Levels of inquiry: Using inquiry spectrum learning sequences to teach science. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 5(3), 11–20.Google Scholar
  53. Wu, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Milrad, M., Ke, H. R., & Huang, Y. M. (2012). An innovative concept map approach for improving students’ learning performance with an instant feedback mechanism. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang, T. C., Hwang, G. J., & Yang, S. J. H. (2013). Development of an adaptive learning system with multiple perspectives based on students’ learning styles and cognitive styles. Educational Technology and Society, 16(4), 185–200.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Beijing Normal University 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Innovative LearningMahidol UniversitySalayaThailand
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationKhon Kaen UniversityKhon KaenThailand

Personalised recommendations