FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W123749256> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W123749256 startingPage "180" @default.
• W123749256 abstract "Introduction Interaction is the key issue facing distance education program designers as pointed out by numerous authors (Egan, Jones, Ferraris & Sabastian, 1993; Penn State, 1992). Lack of face-to-face contact between instructors and students is often cited as the major drawback to distance education. Indeed, for some faculty and administrators, absence of traditional contact, such as, three hours of lecture per week in the same classroom at an appointed hour, renders distance education programs unacceptable. For others, however, the traditional model of learning as a transmission of information from teacher to student is bankrupt (Amthor, 1992). Amthor points out that there is general agreement among researchers that people retain about twenty percent of what they hear, forty percent of what they see and hear, and seventy-five percent of what they see, hear and do (1992). On universities, formally structured opportunities for interaction are important and assumed to be available to all students. For distance education programs, interaction that incorporates seeing, hearing and doing is crucial and therefore it is essential that some means be provided to accommodate this need. In designing an interactive component of a faced with the dilemma of selecting an appropriate technology or rather a group of complementary technologies. There are number of low end and high end technologies that can be implemented to increase the opportunity for interaction. The low end interactive strategies include formal and informal student study groups, peer reviews, group viewing sessions of video material, and correspondence activities. These methods are relatively inexpensive, easy to organize, and can be highly effective. At the opposite end of the spectrum are any number of computer enhanced interactive possibilities including e-mail, computer conferencing, and utilization of electronic bulletin boards to post notices, assignments, and comments. Although more expensive than low end examples, computer interaction provides individuals with an exciting, memorable, and rewarding experience. During the instructional moment, a combination of the low end and high end technologies can be used as tools to ensure interaction between student to student and between student to instructor. Importance of Cognitive Speed Theory The need for interaction can be explained by the cognitive speed theory (Fulford, 1993). This theory is demonstrated in research on reading and compressed speech (Fulford & Zhang, 1993). Most Americans read as fast as 250 to 300 words per minute (Taylor, 1965), and the human ear can listen to average speech at the same rate (Carver, 1982). Learners have the cognitive capacity to process speech at twice the rate at which a lecturer speaks (Fulford & Zhang, 1993). If only half of students' capacity is needed to listen, the other half can be used to engage in internal conversation. While interested learners simulate their own involvement, others may begin to follow thought patterns and lose track of the discussed topic (Fulford & Zhang, 1993). If these learners are not engaged in a situation where interaction is required, their renegade thought patterns may dominate their cognitive activity. A way to ensure active attending behavior is to use technology that allows for two way interaction at a distance with a focus on seeing, hearing and doing. Importance of Interactivity Two way distance education systems which entice high levels of interactivity and user control have been found to best suit instructional needs (Ellis & Mathis, 1985; Hackman & Walker, 1990). Interactive systems where students are encouraged to comment during class have a positive impact on learning and learners' satisfaction. According to Hackman and Walker (1990), interactivity allows distant learners to engage in a form of personal involvement that is essential to effective mediated learning, Cheng, Leham, and Reynolds (1991) indicate that maintaining everyone's alert level in classroom or in a distance education setting appears to be a prime responsibility of the teacher. …" @default.
• W123749256 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W123749256 creator A5009148465 @default.
• W123749256 creator A5011787058 @default.
• W123749256 date "1996-12-22" @default.
• W123749256 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W123749256 title "The Interactivity Component of Distance Learning Implemented in an Art Studio Course" @default.
• W123749256 hasPublicationYear "1996" @default.
• W123749256 type Work @default.
• W123749256 sameAs 123749256 @default.
• W123749256 citedByCount "22" @default.
• W123749256 countsByYear W1237492562013 @default.
• W123749256 countsByYear W1237492562014 @default.
• W123749256 countsByYear W1237492562016 @default.
• W123749256 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W123749256 hasAuthorship W123749256A5009148465 @default.
• W123749256 hasAuthorship W123749256A5011787058 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C144430266 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C168167062 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C2778496695 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C45012715 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C49774154 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C503872463 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C76155785 @default.
• W123749256 hasConcept C97355855 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C121332964 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C144430266 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C145420912 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C15744967 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C168167062 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C19417346 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C2524010 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C2778496695 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C33923547 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C41008148 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C45012715 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C49774154 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C503872463 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C76155785 @default.
• W123749256 hasConceptScore W123749256C97355855 @default.
• W123749256 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W123749256 hasLocation W1237492561 @default.
• W123749256 hasOpenAccess W123749256 @default.
• W123749256 hasPrimaryLocation W1237492561 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W1488402545 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W1513877877 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W1539877484 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W1540518856 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W19589414 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W1989052356 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W2085970550 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W235027860 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W246122482 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W2963087668 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W2993763729 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W315953185 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W3171500144 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W337322759 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W341408080 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W4523243 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W72210556 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W96099640 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W2043223283 @default.
• W123749256 hasRelatedWork W2272220885 @default.
• W123749256 hasVolume "117" @default.
• W123749256 isParatext "false" @default.
• W123749256 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W123749256 magId "123749256" @default.
• W123749256 workType "article" @default.