- citati u SCIndeksu: 0
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:9
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:3
|
|
|
2022, vol. 19, br. 2, str. 114-122
|
|
Interaktivnost u nastavnom procesu - efekat demografskih promena
The interactivity of the teaching process: The effect of demographic variables
Projekat: This paper is a part of the research project "Analysis of quality and effectiveness of the teaching process in Higher Schools of vocational Studies" funded by the Provincial Secretariat for Higher Education and Scientific Research of Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Republic of Serbia
Sažetak
Ovo istraživanje imalo je za cilj da se istraže procene studenata vezane za interaktivnosti u nastavnom procesu. Učestvovao je 361 sudent od kojih su 127 (35.2%) bili muškarci, a njih 234 (64.8%) žene. Studenti su bili uzrasta između 18 i 54 godine (M = 22.32, SD = 5.926). Pol, godina studija, model finansiranja studija, mesto u kom žive, prethodno obrazovanje i visokoškolska institucija koju pohađaju, ispitivani su kao demografske varijable. Interaktivnost je merena pomoću petostepene skale Likertovog tipa (1= u potpunosti se ne slažem; 5 = u potpunosti se slažem) a učesnici su trebali da procene svoje iskustvo u vezi sa tim koliko je interaktivnost izražena u nastavnom procesu škole koju pohađaju. Rezultati ukazuju na to da je ukupna procena interaktivnosti visoka (M= 3.98, SD=.850), kao i da se studenti razlikuju u svojim procenama u odnosu na to koju visoku školu pohađaju (F(4, 360) = 3.187, p<.014). Nalazi ovog istraživanja su diskutovani u kontekstu mogućeg unapređenja interaktivnosti u okviru nastavnog procesa.
Abstract
This research aims to explore the students' evaluations of interactivity in the teaching process. The research involved 361 students, 127 (35.2%) male and 234 (64.8%) female students. The participants were between 18 and 54 years old (M = 22.32, SD = 5.926). Questions related to the previous and current education of participants, their age, gender and place of residence were included as demographic variables. Interactivity in the teaching process was measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Participants had to evaluate their experience of how interactive the teaching processes they had participated in were. The results have shown that the overall assessment of interactivity is relatively high (M= 3.98, SD=.850). Furthermore, the higher education institution that the students attend had a significant effect on their evaluations of interactivity (F(4, 360) = 3.187, p<.014). The results are discussed in the context of possible improvements in interactivity in the teaching process.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
  
|
Benware, C.A., Deci, E.L. (1984) Quality of Learning With an Active Versus Passive Motivational Set. American Educational Research Journal, 21(4): 755-765
|
|
|
Healey, M., Healey, R.L. (2019) Students as partner's guide: Student engagement through partnership. New York: Advance HE
|
|
|
Healey, M., Flint, A., Harrington, K. (2014) Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy
|
|
|
Healey, R.L. (2012) The power of debates: Reflections on their potential for geography in higher education: Teaching for social transformation through debate. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(2): 239-25
|
|
|
Hoque, M.E. (2016) The Effect of the Teacher-Students Interaction: An Evaluation of an EFL Classroom. Journal of EFL Education and Research JEFLE, p. 1
|
|
 
|
Kobayashi, K. (2019) Interactivity: A Potential Determinant of Learning by Preparing to Teach and Teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 9: 27-55
|
|
|
Kutbiddinova, R.A., Eromasova, A.A., Romanova, M.A. (2016) The Use of Interactive Methods in the Educational Process of the Higher Education Institution. International journal of environmental & science education, 11(14): 6557-6572
|
|
|
Miller, P. (2012) Ten Characteristics of a Good Teacher. English Teaching Forum, 1: 36-38
|
|
|
Rajapriya, M., Kumar, N. (2017) Effectiveness of mind mapping in higher education. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4): 975-98
|
|
|
Stewart, R.A. (1989) Interaction effects of teacher enthusiasm and student note-taking on recall and recognition of lecture content. Communication Research Reports, 6(2), 84-89
|
|
|
Walker, R. (2008) Twelve characteristics of an effective teacher: A Longitudinal, Qualitative, Quasi-Research Study of In-service and Pre service Teachers' Opinions. Educational horizons, pp. 61-68
|
|
|
Wang, Y., Lin, L., Chen, O. (2021) The benefits of teaching on comprehension, motivation, and perceived difficulty: Empirical evidence of teaching expectancy and the interactivity of teaching. British Journal of Education Psychology, 91(4), 1275-1290
|
|
|
Yea, K. (2019) Interactive techniques. https://www.usf.edu/atle/documents/handout-interactive-techniques.pdf
|
|
|
|
|