Is blended e-learning as measured by an achievement test and self-assessment better than traditional classroom learning for vocational high school students?
PDF
HTML

Keywords

Blended e-learning
learning performance
electrical machinery

How to Cite

Chang, C.-C. (2018). Is blended e-learning as measured by an achievement test and self-assessment better than traditional classroom learning for vocational high school students?. Health Sciences: An OJS Theme Demo, 1(3). Retrieved from https://demo.publicknowledgeproject.org/ojs3/demo/index.php/health-sciences/article/view/712

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of blended e-learning on electrical machinery performance (achievement test and self-assessment). Participants were two classes of 11th graders majoring in electrical engineering and taking the electrical machinery class at a vocational high school in Taiwan. The participants were randomly selected and assigned to either the experimental group (n = 33) which studied through blended e-learning or the control group (n = 32) which studied through traditional classroom learning. The experiment lasted for five weeks. The results showed that (a) there were no significant differences in achievement test scores between blended e-learning and traditional learning; (b) students in the experimental group obtained significantly higher scores on self-assessment than students in the control group; (c) students’ scores on self-assessment were significantly higher after studying through blended e-learning than before. Overall, blended e-learning did not significantly affect students’ achievement test scores, but significantly affected their self-assessment scores.

PDF
HTML

References

Cole TJ, Bellizzi MC, Flegal KM, Dietz WH. Establishing a standard definition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. BMJ 2000;320(7244):1240-1243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1240 URL: http://www.bmj.com/content/320/7244/1240

Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, Thomson B, Graetz N, Margono C. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 2014;384(9945):766-781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60460-8 URL: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)60460-8/fulltext

Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet. 2012; 380(9859):2224-2260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61766-8 PMID: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23245609 URL: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(12)61766-8/fulltext

Martin A, Saunders DH, Shenkin SD, Sproule J. Lifestyle intervention for improving school achievement in overweight or obese children and adolescents. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 3: CD009728. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009728.pub2

Shaw KA, O`Rourke P, Mar C., Kenardy J. Psychological interventions for overweight or obesity. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015; 2:CD003818. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003818.pub2

Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loverman E, Frampton GK. Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 8:CD003641. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003641.pub4

Padwal RS, Rucker D, Li SK, Curioni C, Lau DCW. Long-term pharmacotherapy for obesity and overweight. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2003; 4:CD004094. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004094.pub2

Al-Khudairy L, Loveman E, Colquitt JL, Mead E, Johnson RE, Fraser H, Olajide J, Murphy M, Velho RM, O’Malley C, Azevedo LB, Ells LJ, Metzendorf, MI, Rees K. Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 6:CD012691. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012691

Khera R, Murad MH, Chandar AK, Dulai PS, Wang Z, Prokop LJ, Loomba R, Camilleri M, Singh S. Association of Pharmacological Treatments for Obesity With Weight Loss and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016; 315(22):2424-2434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.7602

Cheng J, Gao J, Shuai X, Wang G, Tao K. The comprehensive summary of surgical versus non-surgical treatment for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Oncotarget. 2016; 7(26):39216-39230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.9581 PMID: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27233078

Clegg A, Colquitt J, Sidhu M, Royle P, Walker A. Clinical and cost effectiveness of surgery for morbid obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation. International Journal of Obesity. 2003; 27:1167-1177.

Neovius M, Narbro K. Cost-effectiveness of pharmacological anti-obesity treatments: a systematic review. International Journal of Obesity. 2008; 32:1752-1763. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2008.189