The Computer Course Correlation between Learning Satisfaction and Learning Effectiveness of Vocational College in Taiwan
1
Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Vanung University, ZhongliDist., Taoyuan City 32061, Taiwan
2
Department of Industrial Management, St. John’s University, Tamsui District, New Taipei 25135, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Symmetry 2019, 11(6), 822; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11060822
Submission received: 20 May 2019
/
Revised: 5 June 2019
/
Accepted: 10 June 2019
/
Published: 21 June 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Selected Papers from IIKII 2019 conferences in Symmetry)
Abstract
:In this paper, we surveyed the influence of learn effectiveness in a computer course under the factors of learning attitude and learning problems for students in senior-high school. We followed the formula for a regression line as R = A + BX +ε and simulated on SPSS platform with symmetry to obtained the results as follows: (1) In learning attitude, both the cognitive-level and behavior-level, are positively correlated with satisfaction. This means the students have cognitive-level and behavior-level more positively correlated with satisfaction in computer subjects and have a high degree of self-learning effectiveness. (2) In learning problems, the female students had higher learning effectiveness than male students, and the students who practiced on the computer on their own initiative long-term each week had higher learning effectiveness.
1. Introduction
Education should focus on cultivating professional skills and combining practice with practice to enable students to have the ability to work in response to the rapid changes in the current industrial structure. Therefore, in addition to paying attention to students’ professional and practical abilities, students should also have professional abilities in order to improve their graduation employment rate and employment competitiveness [1].
The ultimate goal of school is to assist students in acquiring the skills of employment. Therefore, the content of the curriculum should complement the workplace and assist students in obtaining professional skills related to their work [2].
How to make students have the motivation to learn, and then generate interest in active learning is an important question. A teacher should understand the behavioral motivation of students in a timely manner while teaching [3], as well as the learning attitude (including cognition, emotion, and behavior) that students hold while studying computer courses, and the troubles encountered in learning.
We also analyze the “learning attitude” and “learning problems” of the learning effectiveness frame for high vocational students to understand the student’s personal background variables for learning attitude, learning problems, and learning effectiveness, and the relationship between learning attitude, learning problems, and learning effectiveness [4,5].
This paper is based on the symmetry subject of computer courses with students of the Information Process Department and International Trade Department to survey student learning attitudes and learning problems in the subject of computers. This paper aims to analyze the learning effectiveness and related issues of computer courses for higher vocational students through the questionnaire approach.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the design structure and progress of the research. Section 3 presents the implemented research. Section 4 documents symmetry regressing on analysis between learning attitude and learning effectiveness. The regression analysis of learning problems to learning effectiveness is described in Section 5. Finally, we conclude the paper in Section 6.
2. Research Design and Progress
In this paper, we use a frame work to measure learning attitudes and learning problems for analyzing the learning effectiveness influences on students studying a computer course. In order to implement the above framework, firstly, we used a questionnaire survey to search the symmetry relationship between variables, and statistical methods for analyzing empirical data and verification the hypothesis.
2.1. Research Object and QuestionnaireResponse
The research objects of this paper were aimed at the three degree students of the Information Process Department and the International Trade Department. We issued in total 219 questionnaires through on-site distribution to students. The number of responses of valid questionnaires was 196 (89.49% response rate).
2.2. Research Tools
The measurement tool was a questionnaire of “learning attitudes and learning problems for learning effectiveness influences of computer courses”, which included the following four categories: learning attitude, learning problems, learning effectiveness, and personal basic information. They are described as follows.
- (1)
- Personal basic information includes sex, age, department, and practice computer time every week.
- (2)
- Learning effectiveness factors include the learning attitude frame and the learning problems frame. The learning attitude frame has three parts as cognitive, emotional, and behavioral. The learning problems frame has four parts: personal, family, school, and course content. The learning effectiveness frame has four parts: class schedule, teacher teaching, learning environment, and learning results.
2.3. Assessment Method of Questionnaire
The questionnaire used a scale from 1 to 4, with “4” indicating very much agree, “3” indicating agree, “2” indicating disagree, and “1” indicating very much disagree. For the questionnaire, we set some reverse test questions, which meant that the sampled students had the attention item content when answering “not applicable”.
2.4. Questionnaire Pretest
The pretest questionnaire was processed by random to 25 third grade students of high vocational education school. The main purpose of this pretest was to test the internal consistency and consistency when answering the questionnaire questions. We found α coefficient with high reliability for values larger than 0.898. The results of α coefficient are listed as Table 1.
3. Research Implementation
The samples of this questionnaire were third grade students of the International Trade Department and Information Process Department. As for the initial issued samples, the number was 219 and the number of valid questionnaires was 196. The details of these are shown in Table 2.
3.1. Data Analysis and Results
After administering the response questionnaires, we deleted the invalid questionnaire, and then carried out statistics and analyzed the valid questionnaire using SPSS 15.0. The methods of statistical analysis are described as follows.
- (1)
- Narrative statistics was used to organize and present the characteristics of the existing data using statistical description groups. The methods used in this paper were: average, standard deviation, number of times, and percentage to understand the situation of the subject [6].
- (2)
- Variance analysis was used to test whether there was a difference in the average of the maternal group. If there was a significant difference in variance analysis, then carried out a T-test to confirm whether there was a difference in the average of each selected group. In this paper, single factor variance analysis was used to test whether the student’s personal background variables had a significant level of learning attitude, learning problems, and learning effectiveness [7,8].
- (3)
- Regression analysis (RA) was used as a symmetry statistical method for analyzing data, mainly to determine specific relationships between the survey data.
Regression analysis is a relation model that was used to create the symmetry dependent variable Y and independent variable X. In this paper, we exploited multi regression analysis to create the frame of learning attitude and learning problems to use as a pre-prediction model for learning effectiveness, and then survey the influence level between those two frames and learning effectiveness [9].
3.2. Learning Attitude and Learning Problems for Learning Effectiveness
For the learning attitude, if a higher score was obtained, the more positive the learning attitude was than if a lower score was obtained, and vices versa. The average score of the fourth-order scale was 2.5 points. However, for learning problems, if the average scale was lower than 2.5 points which indicated those had less learning and those who had higher learning.
For learning effectiveness, an average scores for each question higher than 2.5 indicated that the training effectiveness was slightly positive. We found that if the teacher patiently guided students through computer related issues, the average score was 3.01 points. This meant students had satiable faction of learning because the teacher was able to patiently teach the students and the students were more satisfied.
4. Regression Analysis between Learning Attitude and Learning Effectiveness
In this paper, we used the symmetry regression analysis (R), coefficient of determination (R2), adjusted R2, and F test. Regression analysis is a powerful statistical method that allows the examination of the relationship between two or more variables of interest. The formula for a regression line can be given as R = A + BX +ε, where A and B are coefficients (also are constants). X and R are the independent and dependent variables, and ε is the error term [10].
We also showed the p value, which referred to the probability that the statistical symmetry summary (such as the difference between the two groups of samples) was the same as the actual observation data, or even larger, in a probability model.
4.1. Learning Attitude and Learning Effectiveness under Class Schedule
Table 3 shows the regression analysis of computer subject for learning attitude to learning effectiveness under class schedule. For the class schedule relation, the cognitive coefficient of learning attitude to learning effectiveness was 0.578 and was significantly positively correlated. This meant that with students in computer courses, the learning attitude was higher and more positive, and the active students had more satisfaction with the class schedule.
For the class schedule correlation, the coefficient of learning attitude behavior to learning effectiveness was 0.327 and was also significantly positively correlated. This indicated that the computer course students had a higher number and more positive learning attitude, and the positive students were more satisfied with the class schedule.
The learning effectiveness correlation coefficient of the emotion of learning attitude was 0.205, but the p value was 0.144, which indicted that there was no significant difference. Inferred from the above, the possible reasons may be that the students were just beginning to experience the computer subject or if just contact with the course was not enough to influence class schedule satisfaction by the aspect of learning emotion.
4.2. Regression Analysis between Learning Attitude and Teacher Teaching
Table 4 shows the symmetry regression analysis of teacher teaching under the computer subject of learning attitude cognitive to learning effectiveness with a p value <0.000***, so the equation was valid. As seen in Table 4, we found the correlative coefficient between cognitive of learning attitude cognitive and teacher teaching of learning effectiveness was 0.287 and had a positive correlation (P < 0.005**).
Based on the above results, if the learning attitude of students in the computer course was higher and more positive, the positive students had higher satisfaction with teacher teaching.
Regression analysis of teacher teaching of the computer subject of learning attitude behavior to learning effectiveness had a p value <0.000***, so the equation was also valid. As seen in Table 4, the correlation coefficient between cognitive of learning attitude cognitive and teacher teaching of learning effectiveness was 0.406 and had appositive correlation. This indicated that the students’ learning behavior in the computer course was higher and more positive, and the positive students were more satisfied with teacher teaching.
Finally, we conducted symmetry regression analysis of teacher teaching under the computer subject of learning attitude emotion to learning effectiveness. We found the correlation coefficient between emotion of learning attitude cognitive and teacher teaching of learning effectiveness was 0.041, but the p value was 0.717, which meant there was no significant difference. The possible reason was that students were beginning to understand the computer subject, and they had a preliminary feeling about learning emotion in the course. There were not enough factors to influence their satisfaction with teacher teaching.
4.3. Regression Analysis between Learning Attitude and Learning Environment
Table 5 shows the regression analysis of learning attitude to learning environment in the computer course. As seen in Table 5, we found the correlation coefficient between cognitive of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness to be 0.390, which was a positive correlation. This indicates that the computer course students’ subject of learning attitude cognitive was higher and more positive, and the positive students had higher satisfaction with the learning environment.
The symmetry correlation coefficient between emotion of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness was 0.326, which was a positive correlation. This indicates that the computer course students’ learning attitude emotion was higher and more positive, and the positive students were more satisfied with the learning environment.
Furthermore, the symmetry correlative coefficient between behavior of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness was 0.446 and had a positive correlation. This indicated that the computer course students’ learning attitude behavior was higher and more positive, and the positive students had higher satisfaction with the learning environment.
4.4. Regression Analysis between Learning Attitude and Learning Results
Table 6 shows the regression question for the computer subject of learning attitude to learning results. As seen in Table 6, we found the correlation coefficient between cognitive of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness to be 0.573 with a positive correlative. This indicates that the computer course students’ learning attitude cognitive was higher and more positive, and the positive students had higher satisfaction with the learning results.
The correlative coefficient between emotions of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness was 0.126, but the p value was 0.717, which meant that there was no significant difference. The results may indicate that students were beginning to understand the computer subject, and they had a preliminary feeling about learning emotion in the course. There were not enough factors to influence their satisfaction with learning results.
Furthermore, the correlative coefficient between behavior of learning attitude cognitive and learning environment of learning effectiveness was 0.382 and was appositive correlation. This indicates the computer course students’ learning attitude behaviors were higher and more positive, and the positive students had the higher satisfaction with the learning results.
5. Regression Analysis of Learning Problems to Learning Effectiveness
5.1. Regression Analysis of Class Schedule between Learning Problems and Learning Effectiveness
As seen in Table 7, which shows the regression question between the computer subject of learning problems and class schedule, we also found the p value <0.000***, which indicated the regression question was valid. We also found the correlation coefficient between learning problems and learning effectiveness of class schedule was –0.479, which was a negative correlation. This represents the lower degree of computer subject learning problems of student with higher satisfaction in the class schedule.
5.2. Regression Analysis between Learning Problems and Teacher Teaching
As seen Table 8, which shows the regression question between the computer subject of learning problems and teacher teaching, we also found the p value <0.000***, which indicated the regression question was valid. We also found the correlation coefficient between learning problems and learning effectiveness was –0.309, which was a negative correlation. This represents the lower the degree of computer subject learning problems of student with higher satisfaction in teacher teaching.
5.3. Regression Analysis between Learning Problems and Learning Environment
As seen in Table 9, which shows the regression question between the computer subject of learning problems and learning environment, we also found the p value <0.000***, which indicated the regression question was valid. We also found the correlation coefficient between learning problems and learning effectiveness was −0.510, which was a negative correlation. This represents the lower the degree of computer subject learning problems of students with higher satisfaction in the learning environment.
5.4. Regression Analysis of Learning Problems to Learning Results
In Table 10, which shows the regression question (=0.465) between the computer subject of learning problems and learning results, we also found the p value <0.000***, which indicated the regression question was valid. We also found a negative correlation coefficient between learning problems and learning effectiveness of –0.580. It represents the lower degree of computer subject learning problems of student with higher satisfaction in learning results.
6. Conclusions
In this paper, symmetry we surveyed a computer course of learning attitudes and learning problems to learning effectiveness as influences. We summarized the results as follows.
- For students in computer course, learning attitude to learning effectiveness had a higher difference. However, for the level of cognitive and behavioral with positive correlative satisfaction results showed students with more positive learning attitude cognitive and learning behavior than with higher satisfaction of class schedule, teacher teaching, teaching environment, and learning results.
- For the emotion of learning attitude to learning effectiveness, there are significant differences in learning environment. The most students had more approval in the learning environment in emotion.
- For the computer course analysis of learning problems to learning effectiveness, the learning problems to learning effectiveness symmetry as class schedule, teacher teaching, teaching environment, and learning had results with negative correlations. If they have higher satisfaction of class schedule, teacher teaching learning environment, and learning results.
Author Contributions
The authors contributed equally to the conception of the idea, implementing and analyzing the experimental results, and writing the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Campos, A.M. Analyzing the Effectiveness of Learning Objects and Designs. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Athens, GA, USA, 6–8 July 2011; pp. 650–651. [Google Scholar]
- Chatzara, K.; Karagiannidis, C.; Stamatis, D. Students Attitude and Learning Effectiveness of Emotional Agents. In Proceedings of the 2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Sousse, Tunisia, 5–7 July 2010; pp. 558–559. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, X. Bidirectional Extreme Learning Machine for Regression Problem and Its Learning Effectiveness. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2012, 23, 1498–1505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mishra, N.R.; Chavhan, R.K. Effectiveness of mobile learning on awareness about learning disability among student teachers. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Technology Enhanced Education (ICTEE), Kerala, India, 3–5 January 2012; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Krikun, I. Applying learning analytics methods to enhance learning quality and effectiveness in virtual learning environments. In Proceedings of the 2017 5th IEEE Workshop on Advances in Information, Electronic and Electrical Engineering (AIEEE), Riga, Latvia, 24–25 November 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Shadiev, R.; Hwang, W.; Huang, Y.; Liu, A. Cognitive Diffusion Model: Facilitating EFL Learning in an Authentic Environment. 2017. Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7497494 (accessed on 17 June 2019).
- Joseph, N.; Pradeesh, N.; Chatterjee, S.; Bijlani, K. A novel approach for group formation in collaborative learning using learner preferences. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), Karnataka, India, 13–16 September 2017; pp. 1564–1568. [Google Scholar]
- Boicu, C.; Tecuci, G.; Boicu, M. Learning complex problem solving expertise from failures. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA 2007), Cincinnati, OH, USA, 13–15 December 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Dehghani-Pilehvarani, A.; Karimaghaee, P.; Khayatian, A. Combined gradient and Iterative Learning Control method for magnetostatic inverse problem. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Control, Instrumentation, and Automation, Tehran, Iran, 28–30 December 2013; pp. 334–339. [Google Scholar]
- Krishnan, M.; Muhammad, R.; Ruhizan, Y. Problem based learning in Engineering Education at Malaysian polytechnics: A proposal. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 7–8 December 2009; pp. 122–124. [Google Scholar]
Table 1.
Questionnaire Cronbach α reliability analysis.
| Frame Classification | Numbers | Cronbach α Coefficient |
|---|---|---|
| Learning attitude-cognitive | 8 | 0.877 |
| Learning attitude-emotional | 8 | 0.805 |
| Learning attitude-behavioral | 11 | 0.871 |
| Learning problems frame | 14 | 0.887 |
| Learning effectiveness-class schedule | 3 | 0.755 |
| Learning effectiveness-teacher teaching | 8 | 0.929 |
| Learning effectiveness-learning environment | 5 | 0.850 |
| Learning effectiveness-learning results | 4 | 0.791 |
| Total Reliability | 61 | 0.898 |
Table 2.
Questionnaire response information.
| Items | Issues | Sort | Response Questionnaire | Ratio of Useful Questionnaire |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Trade Dept. A | 45 | valid | 43 | 95.56% |
| invalid | 2 | |||
| International Trade Dept. B | 36 | valid | 30 | 83.33% |
| invalid | 6 | |||
| Information Process Dept. A | 34 | valid | 30 | 88.24% |
| invalid | 4 | |||
| Information Process Dept. B | 34 | valid | 33 | 97.06% |
| invalid | 1 | |||
| Information Process Dept. C | 35 | valid | 33 | 94.29% |
| invalid | 2 | |||
| Information Process Dept. D | 35 | valid | 27 | 77.14% |
| invalid | 8 | |||
| Total | 219 | valid | 196 | 89.49% |
| invalid | 23 |
Table 3.
Attitude to class schedule regression analysis.
| Item | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.656 | |||
| R2 | 0.430 | |||
| AdjustedR2 | 0.421 | |||
| F-test | 48.36 | |||
| Learning attitude | Cognitive | Emotion | Behavior | |
| Class schedule | ||||
| Coefficient | 0.578 | 0.205 | 0.327 | |
| p value | <0.000*** | 0.144 | <0.01** | |
Table 4.
Subject of learning attitude to teacher teaching regression analysis.
| Item | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.586 | |||
| R2 | 0.344 | |||
| AdjustedR2 | 0.333 | |||
| F-test | 33.58 | |||
| Learning attitude | Cognitive | Emotion | Behavior | |
| Teacher teaching | ||||
| Coefficient | 0.287 | 0.041 | 0.406 | |
| p value | <0.005** | 0.717 | <0.000*** | |
Table 5.
Subject of learning attitude to learning environment regression analysis.
| Item | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.692 | |||
| R2 | 0.479 | |||
| AdjustedR2 | 0.470 | |||
| F-test | 58.86 | |||
| Learning attitude | Cognitive | Emotional | Behavioral | |
| Learning environment | ||||
| Coefficient | 0.390 | 0.326 | 0.446 | |
| p value | <0.001*** | <0.01** | <0.000*** | |
Table 6.
Subject of learning attitude to learning results regression analysis.
| Item | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.655 | |||
| R2 | 0.429 | |||
| AdjustedR2 | 0.420 | |||
| Learning attitude | Cognitive | Emotional | Behavioral | |
| Learning results | ||||
| Coefficient | 0.573 | 0.126 | 0.382 | |
| p value | <0.000*** | 0.360 | <0.000*** | |
Table 7.
Computer subject of learning problems to class schedule regression analysis.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.378 |
| R2 | 0.143 |
| AdjustedR2 | 0.138 |
| F-test | 32.442 |
| Coefficient | –0.479 |
Table 8.
Computer subject of learning problems to teacher teaching.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.319 |
| R2 | 0.102 |
| AdjustedR2 | 0.097 |
| F-test | 22.129 |
| Coefficient | –0.309 |
Table 9.
Computer subject of learning problems to learning environment.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.408 |
| R2 | 0.166 |
| AdjustedR2 | 0.162 |
| F-test | 38.777 |
| Coefficient | -0.510 |
Table 10.
Computer subject of learning problems to learning results regression analysis.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Regression factor (R) | 0.465 |
| R2 | 0.216 |
| AdjustedR2 | 0.212 |
| F-test | 53.64 |
| Coefficient | –0.580 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Chen, R.-Y.; Tu, J.-F. The Computer Course Correlation between Learning Satisfaction and Learning Effectiveness of Vocational College in Taiwan. Symmetry 2019, 11, 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11060822
AMA Style
Chen R-Y, Tu J-F. The Computer Course Correlation between Learning Satisfaction and Learning Effectiveness of Vocational College in Taiwan. Symmetry. 2019; 11(6):822. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11060822
Chicago/Turabian StyleChen, Ru-Yan, and Jih-Fu Tu. 2019. "The Computer Course Correlation between Learning Satisfaction and Learning Effectiveness of Vocational College in Taiwan" Symmetry 11, no. 6: 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11060822
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
