THE LEVEL OF LECTURERS’ PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS AMONG OPEN-DISTANCE LEARNING (ODL) STUDENTS IN PUBLIC SPEAKING ASSESSMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJEPC.1164015Keywords:
Lecturer, Open-Distance Learning (ODL) Students, Public Speaking AssessmentAbstract
The expansion of Open and Distance Learning (ODL) has significantly transformed teaching and assessment practices in higher education (Garrison, 2011; Moore & Kearsley, 2012). This study aims to examine the level of lecturer’s perceived effectiveness among ODL students in public speaking assessment. A quantitative method with a descriptive research design was employed, involving 400 undergraduate students from selected higher education institutions. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire measuring instructional clarity, feedback quality, student engagement, and assessment practices. Descriptive statistical analysis revealed that the overall level of lecturer effectiveness was high. Among the dimensions, instructional clarity and feedback quality recorded the highest mean scores, while student engagement showed relatively lower scores. The findings suggest that although lecturers are generally effective in ODL environments, there is a need to enhance interactive teaching strategies to improve student engagement. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on ODL effectiveness and provides practical implications for improving public speaking assessment in online learning contexts.
Downloads
References
Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). Athabasca University Press.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2010). Online and blended business education for the 21st century: Current research and future directions. Journal of Management Education, 34(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562909335583
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Bolliger, D. U., & Martindale, T. (2004). Key factors for determining student satisfaction in online courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 61–67.
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55.
Kearns, L. R. (2012). Student assessment in online learning: Challenges and effective practices. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(3), 198–208.
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in online learning. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.
Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22–38). Routledge.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Wadsworth.
Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.
Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v3i1.79
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1),153- 189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007
Tuckman, B. W. (2007). The effect of motivational scaffolding on procrastinators’ distance learning outcomes. Educational Psychology.
Vonderwell, S., & Turner, S. (2005). Active learning and online course design. The International Journal of Learning, 12(1), 55–66.
Wang, Y. S. (2003). Assessment of learner satisfaction in asynchronous electronic learning systems. Information & Management, 41(1), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00028-4
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
