網絡課程教學交互質量評價指標體系的研究

Study of the Index System for Assessing Interactive Qualities of Web-based Course

隨著網絡教育的迅速發展，其質量瘦到普遍關注，而網絡課程又是網絡教育的主體。相關研究表明交互是影響網絡課程質量的重要因素，然而諸多調查研究顯示目前網絡課程在如何有效促進交互方面仍存在不足。為幫助從事遠程教育的教師評價已有網絡課程的交互質量，並有效的改進教學實踐，該研究旨在設計量化的、可操作的網絡課程教學交互質量評價指標體系。研究採用了文獻分析、問卷調查、專家論證、訪談等方法，過程主要包括以下步驟：（1）文獻的綜合和分析；（2）指標體系初稿的設計，確定從媒體界面的交互性、學生和學習資源的交互、社會性交互的教學設計、教師的參與程度和學生的參與程度等五個維度，共63個指標評價網絡課程教學交互質量；（3）徵求專業人員的意見；（4）邀請12名專家對每個指標的明確性、必要性等進行效度論證，並根據專家的意見刪除12個必要性不夠的指標；（5）將修訂後的指標以問卷的形式隨機排列，通過問卷調查和訪談，刪除了學生難以理解和回答的4個指標，從而確定了最終的指標體系，包括5個維度，共47個指標。

With E-learning rapidly developing， the quality of its main carrier， web-based course attracts extensive interest. Although it is reported that the interaction plays an important role for the quality of web-based courses， some investigations show that the present web-based course still lack effective interaction. In order to help distance instructors assess the instructional interaction of their courses and improve instructional activities effectively， we try to propose an index system， which may be used to assess the interaction quality quantitatively and operationally.Several methods are used including literature analysis， questionnaires， expert rating and interview， etc. the procedure is mainly consisted of: （1）Generalization and analysis of literature. （2）Design of the draft of the index system， which involved 5 dimensions and 63 indexes. （3）Asking specialists for advice. （4）Inviting 12 experts on distance education to discuss the efficiency of this index system， such as definitude and necessity for each index， scale of each dimension， and their holistic suggestion， then deleting 12 unnecessary indexes and revising others according to the opinions of the experts. （5）Designing questionnaires in which all indexes are arranged randomly， and then deleting 4 indexes that are thought unclear and difficult to understand according to questionnaire and interview. In the end， the final version of the index system is determined which includes 5 dimensions， interactivity of the media interface， interaction between learners and resources， instructional design for social interaction， evidence of instructor engagement and evidence of learners engagement， all of these reaching up to 47 indexes.