Blended learning in design education: An analysis of students' experiences within the disciplinary differences framework

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 31-44

  Pektaş, Şule Taşli ^a   Gürel, Meltem Ö ^a  

^a BILKENT UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897457037     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14495554     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14742/ajet.372     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adams, J., Hyde, W., & Murray, B. (2013). Design education: international perspectives and debates (editorial). International Journal of Art and Design Education, 32(2), 142-145.
2. Arbaugh, J. B., Bangert, A., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2010). Subject matter effects and the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework: An exploratory study. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 37-44.
3. Ardaiz-Villanueva, O., Nicuesa-Chacon, X., Brene-Artazcoz, O., Lizarraga, M. L., & Baquedano, M. T. (2011). Evaluation of computer tools for idea generation and team formation in project-based learning. Computers & Education, 56, 700-711.
4. Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2006). Using online education technologies to support studio education. Educational Technology & Society, 9(4), 114-122.
5. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 195-213.
6. Bliuc, A., Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2011). A blended learning approach to teaching foreign policy: student experiences of learning through face-to-face and online discussion and their relationship to academic performance. Computers & Education, 56, 856-864.
7. Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2009). Evaluating the quality of e-learning at the degree level in the student experience of blended learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 652-663.
8. Gürel, M. Ö. (2010). Explorations in teaching sustainable design: a studio experience in interior design/architecture. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(2), 184-199.
9. Ham J. J., & Schnabel, M. A. (2011). Web 2.0 virtual design studio: social networking as facilitator of design education. Architectural Science Review, 54, 108-116.
10. Hew, K. F. (2011). Students' and teachers' use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 662-676.
11. Hornik, S., Saunders, C. S., Li, Y., Moskal, P. D., & Dzuiban, C. D. (2008). The impact of paradigm development and course level on performance in technology-mediated learning environments. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Discipline, 11, 35-58.
12. Howsen, R. M., & Lile, S. (2008). A comparison of course delivery methods: An exercise in experimental economics. Journal of Economics and Finance Education, 7(1), 21-28.
13. Joy, E. H., & Garcia, F. E. (2000). Measuring learning effectiveness: A new look at no-significantdifference findings. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(1), 33-39.
14. Karakaya, A. F., & Pektas, S. T. (2007). A framework for web-based education systems supporting interdisciplinary design collaboration. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 24(2), 137-148. http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2007/cilt24/sayi_2/137-148.pdf
15. Kristof, A. L., Brown, K. G., Sims, H. P., & Smith, K. A. (1995). The virtual team: A case study and inductive model. Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, 2, 229-53.
16. Lopez-Perez, M. V., Perez-Lopez, M. C., & Rodrigues-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students' perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56, 818-826.
17. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Neumann, R. (2001). Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 135-146.
19. Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405-417.
20. Novakova, K., Achten, H., & Matejovska, D (2010). A design studio pedagogy for experiments in collaborative design, Future Cities: 28th ECAADE Conference Proceedings,. Retrieved March 10, 2012, from http://cumincad.scix.net/cgi-bin/works/Show?ecaade2010_172
21. Osguthorpe, T. R., & Graham, R. C. (2003). Blended learning environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233.
22. Paechter, M.,& Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students experiences and preferences in elearning. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 292-297.
23. Park, J. Y. (2011). Design education online: learning delivery and evaluation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30(2), 22-33.
24. Pektas, S. T. (2007). A structured analysis of CAAD education. Open House International, 32(2), 46-54.
25. Pektas, S. T. (2010). Effects of cognitive styles on 2D drafting and design performance in digital media. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(1), 63-76.
26. Pektas, S. T., & Demirkan, H. (2011). Experiences with Moodle as a communication tool for design teamwork: a users' perspective. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 28(2), 227-241.
27. SchÖn, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action, New York: Basic Books.
28. SchÖn, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: towards a new design for teaching in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29. SchÖn, D. (1988). Towards a marriage of artistry and applied science in the architectural design studio. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1), 4-10.
30. Smith, G. G., Heindel, A. J., & Torres-Ayala, A. T. (2008). E-learning commodity or community: Disciplinary differences between online courses. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 152-159.
31. Smith, G. G., Passmore, D., & Faught, T. (2009). The challenges of online nursing education. Internet and Higher Education, 12, 98-103.
32. So, H., & Bonk, C. J. (2010). Examining the roles of blended learning approaches in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a Delphi study. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 189-200.
33. Trenholm, S. (2006). An investigation of assessment in fully asynchronous online math courses. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 2(2), 41-55.
34. Türkkan E. E., Basa I., & Gürel M. Ö. (2010). The interaction between the design studio and curriculum courses: A Bilkent University Case. Open House International, 35(3), 66-75.
35. Yang, Y. F., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20, 72-83.