CC BY-NC-ND
0Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 191 (2015) 241 - 249
WCES 2014
An Investigation Of Teacher's Use Of Eleaming In Science Olympiad In Russian Schools
Mustafa Harun Cana*
aAssumption University of Thailand, Graduate School of eLearning, Department of eLearning Methodology, Samut Prakarn, Thailand, 10540
Abstract
Science Olympiad has become an integral part of Russian education. In the last decades various steps have been taken to improve various aspect of Science Olympiad. Politicians, administrators and teachers are looking for a better alternative to increase participation and improve the quality of Olympiads. With the development of new technologies eLearning is becoming increasingly important in Science Olympiads. The aim of this research was to investigate teacher's use of eLearning in Science Olympiad in Russian Schools. For the purposes of this study, in 2013 an on-line survey was conducted to collect data from the Chelyabinsk state secondary schools in Russian Federation. A total of 433 teachers from the Chelyabinsk State secondary schools participated in the survey. Data analysis was done using T-test, descriptive statistics, ANOVA and Pearson Correlation. According to the result, science Olympiad teachers have positive opinion toward using eLearning in science Olympiad. A significant difference was found between teachers' opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads and variables such as subject, teacher's educational qualifications and location of school (p<0.05). The correlation analysis indicated statistically significant relationships between teacher eLearning level and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads (r=0.565, p=0.000). No significant relationship was found between teachers' opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads and variables such as teachers' gender, years of teaching experience and age (p>0.05). Based on the results of the survey this researcher created a website, a repository to provide a variety of resources to facilitate training in Science Olympiad. © 2015TheAuthors.PublishedbyElsevier Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of WCES 2014 Keywords: Science Olympiad, eLearning , Russia
* Mustafa Harun Can. Tel.: +79514446834 E-mail address: mharuncan@yahoo.com
1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of WCES 2014 doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.484
1. Introduction and Literature Review
For the last two centuries the traditional Face-to-Face (F2F) Education has been confined to the classroom. Advent of new technologies and their use in education is changing the modes of learning. In a rapidly changing world each country tends to restructure its own education system using various technologies available today.
Productive, active and talented individuals in any country depend largely on their education systems for nation building. All education systems focus on human development. Providing students with better education has been increased by recent advancements in technology. Traditionally, Science Olympiad has been one of the main components of education in Russian Federation. In 2008-2009 academic year just 423604 students participated, but in 2011 -2012 academic years this figure had risen to 763,159 students. Students are prepared for Science Olympiads by intensive coaching in various subjects covered in these Olympiads. Achievements and ratings of the schools are largely based on number of student engaged in Science Olympiads. Main aim of the Science Olympiads is to explore and extract talented young people at a very early stage and provide them with resources for developing their skills, potential and capabilities. Lebedev, (2004) highlighted Science Olympiad as a means for developing students' research skills and abilities. Podlesny, (2001) stated that one of the effective ways of working with gifted students is through the Science Olympiad. Science Olympiad fosters individualized and flexible learning in contrast to formal F2F education. According to Vyshnepolsky, (2000) Science Olympiad is an educational activity which can influence human development. Science Olympiad is has the potential to better student's knowledge and learning abilities. For this very reason, the Science Olympiad has become integral part of Russian educational system. Many studies have proven that Science Olympiad competitions help in developing student's scientific abilities. Baisheva (2004) emphasized in their study, that Science Olympiad is a very effective method for exploring student's capabilities. Sadovnichiy (2012), Rector of Moscow State University explained the role and impact of the Science Olympiads in Rectors' meeting held in Moscow in 2012. Following this meeting a very heated discussion took place in the educational community. The most serious matter of concern was about the relationship between employers and quality of university graduates. It was highlighted that graduates from Moscow and other universities should meet the challenges of time. According to Masrom, (2007) the concept of Education refers to the support of education by using Internet, computer, telephone, video, radio and other technologies. Tihomirov, (2012) mentions that eLearning is a tool which provides students' with personal education. According to Nagi, Firouz, and Suesawaluk, (2007) eLearning is the process of learning enabled by the use of Internet tools. eLearning is an abbreviated name for electronic learning. Hennebury, (2007) also mentions that eLearning encompasses a broad range of learning technologies, tools, and strategies that can impact learner's knowledge and skill development. According to Powell (2011) eLearning means education in which instruction and content are delivered primarily via the Internet. According to Al-Qahtani and Higgins, (2012), when traditional education and eLearning education are dealt with same topics the result of eLearning are better than what is achieved through the traditional F2F education. Abrami (2006) stated that eLearning in Canada is more effective than traditional F2F education. It provides quick and easy access to education. eLearning is suitable for students who may have problem with their learning abilities. According to Powell (2011) traditional educational systems remain confined within the boundaries of countries. One of the most positive effects of eLearning is its ability to bring together the students in the same city and country but also students located in other parts of the world. According to Davis, (2001), the world is starting a new age of learning where technology is the driving force capable of reaching an increasingly diverse audience with a variety of flexible, compelling, and more effective learning opportunities. By this time, most searches and studies have been conducted to investigate the case of using eLearning in education. A number of studies are positive, the others are unfavourable. Schwirzke, (2011) investigated status and perceptions of administrators of online learning in California K-12 schools. Post, (2010) specified impacts of several factors to add eLearning technologies in their curriculum. Theodocion, (2012) examined perception of middle grades educators toward eLearning professional development courses. Kerry, (2012) investigated ways in which United States public school educators who participated in weekly Twitter Edchat perceived the use of social network site for professional development. In other investigation, "faculty's perceptions of traditional and on-line instruction at post-secondary institutions in North Carolina" was studied by Washington, (2009). Armstrong, (2010) investigated that undergraduate students' experiences and perceptions of online courses. May, (2007) analysed whether some characteristics and perceptions of eLearners in corporate environments result in sense of success or failure. Teo, (2011) investigated the perceptions of eLearning for teaching and learning. Dajani, (2009) evaluated the perceptions of Arab students, faculty members, and administrators at the American University in Cairo towards eLearning using 30 respondents. Alajmi, (2010)
examined the attitudes towards eLearning and skills at College of Basic Education in The Public Authority for Applied Education and Training (PAAET) in Kuwait. Orly, (2007) conducted research to compare teachers', student teachers' and pupils' perceptions about eLearning. Information technology provides greater accessibility to information within and outside the traditional classroom. It has created a new paradigm, one that emphasizes learning over teaching. In addition, lifelong learning (LLL) is also becoming a new focus of adult education. Instead of formalized education which ends with adulthood the new LLL models looks at the needs, interests and desires of each individual at any age. The purpose of the study is to investigate of teacher's use of eLearning in Science Olympiad in Russian Schools on the basis of valid data and reliable information. This investigation had number of specific objectives: i) to examine eLearning level of high school instructors' in preparing for science Olympiad in Russian Federation, ii) to identify high school instructors' opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad, iii) to determine the case of using eLearning in Science Olympiad as an alternative to traditional methods and iv) to open up opportunities for future research in this area to enhance and promote teacher training in Science Olympiad.
2. Research
2.1. Scope of the Research:
The target population of this investigation includes secondary school teachers, preparing students for Science Olympiad in the state of Chelyabinsk in Russian Federation. Chelyabinsk's population consists of 3,580,000 and is 9th in Russian Federation. (Source: Ministry of Development of Russia, 2013). From the given population, 7325 teachers work in 675 high schools. (Source: Ministry of Education of Chelyabinsk, 2012) .
2.2 Hypotheses and Method of the Research:
The focus of the proposed research was to explore the extent of the use of eLearning by teachers of Science Olympiad. Eight hypotheses were structured based on the purpose of the research. H1: There are favourable opinions about using eLearning in Science Olympiad. H2: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's gender and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H3: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's years of experience and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H4: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's age and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H5: There are statistically significant differences between Science Olympiad lessons and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H6: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's educational qualification and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H7: There are statistically significant differences between location of school and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. H8: There are statistically significant differences between teacher eLearning level and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads.
2.3. Data Collection and Analysis:
The researcher contacted Ministry of Education of Chelyabinsk and asked it to procure teachers for this study from all state schools. The invitation letter was sent to all secondary schools. To obtain a high rate of return, researcher stayed in touch with ministry of education of Chelyabinsk every week. In this study, online survey method was used for collecting data thereby mitigating limitations of distance. During the twelve weeks starting from June 1 to September 1, 2013 data was collected. The web based survey was created and conducted through on surveymonkey web site. The survey instrument was designed with the following components: Part-1 of the pilot survey requested demographic data in the form of independent variables involving, gender, age, teaching experience, region, academic level, Olympiad type of lesson name, information about attending educational technology seminars and experience in using computers and Internet. Part-2 of pilot survey listed 22 questions related to the teacher's eLearning skill level and used a 4-point Likert scale ranging 1="I can't do this to" , 2="I can do this with someone assistance", 3="I can do this independently" and 4="I can teach how to do this." Part-3 of the survey contained of 19 questions relating to teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad. It used 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1="strongly disagree" to 4 ="strongly agree". The quantitative data obtained from survey was analysed using PASW 18 software.
2.4. Testing the Hypotheses
H1: There are favourable opinions about using eLearning in Science Olympiad: Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data. The means ranged from 2.32 (lowest) to 3.14 (highest). The three highest-rated items were "Using eLearning is appropriate for my Science lessons" (Mean=3.14, SD=0.767), followed by "Using eLearning gives me more opportunity to update my Science lessons" (Mean=3.09, SD=0.831) and then "Using eLearning in Science Olympiad is beneficial for me" (Mean=3.08, SD=0.801). The two lowest-rated items were "8 Using eLearning in Science Olympiad is 1t convenient" (Mean=2.32, SD=1.025) and then "I tend to prepare students using eLearning rather than using traditional methods" (Mean=2.73, SD=.0815). Participants seemed to express a positive opinion in all items which addressed using eLearning science Olympiad. These result revealed a positive opinion toward using eLearning in science Olympiad. H1 was accepted.
H2: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's gender and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: For testing the mean differences the independent-sample t-test was used. Gender differences in this series of independent variables were tested with t-test for independent samples. Females (M=2.9383) scored higher than males (M=2.9171) but there is no significantly differences, (t=-.367, p=.714). According to test results, H2 was rejected. Table 1 explains measure and Test of Significance of Teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad and Gender Variables
Table 1: Test of Significance of Teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad and Gender Variables
Variables N Mean SD T P-Value
Gender
Male 152 2.9171 .67885 -.367 .714
Female 244 2.9383 .47236
H3: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's years of experience and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Years of experiences differences in this series of dependent variables were tested through one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA). The result indicated that teacher who had more than 15 years of experience in education showed the most positive opinion (M=3.1257, SD=.38354). Teacher who had between 6 and 5 years of experience (M=2.8681, SD=.34154) and between 11and 15 years of experience (M=2.8675, SD=.73065) in education had same opinion. The results also showed the most participants were expressed by "less than 2 year experience" (M=2.9138, SD=.56105). Teacher who had "between 6 and 10 year experience" (M=3.0222, SD=.71121) also showed positive opinion about using eLearning in science Olympiad. As shown in Table 2, the difference in means among years of experience was not significant (F=1.889, p=. 112, alpha=.05). Because of this result, H3 was rejected.
Table 2: Test of Significance of Teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad and Years of Experience Variables
Variables_N_Mean_SD_F_p
Years of Experience
Less than 2 years 156
Between 3 and 5 years 96
Between 6 and 10 years 60
Between 11 and 15 years 52
More than 15 years 32
Total 396
2.9138 .56105 1.889 .112
2.8681 .34154
3.0222 .71121
2.8675 .73065
3.1257 .38354
2.9302 .55995
H4: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's age and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: In terms of age groups, the youngest group presented the most positive opinion (M=3.0422, SD=.54904), while the 25-35 years group had the least positive opinion (M=2.8670, SD=.57557) about using eLearning in science Olympiad. ANOVA was used to compare the mean scores of teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad among the age groups. The result of test in Table-3 specified the probability (.416) associated with the test statistic (F=.984) was greater than alpha (.05). For this reason, there was no statistically significant difference among the age groups, H4 was rejected.
Table 3: Test of Significance of Teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad and Age Variables
Variables N Mean SD F P
25 years or less 108 3.0422 .54904 .984 .416
Between 25 and 35 192 2.9030 .57557
Between 36 and 45 68 2.8670 .57326
Between 46 and 55 20 3.0014 .40759
Older than 55 years 8 2.8778 .52264
Total 396 2.9302 .55995
H5: There are statistically significant differences between Science Olympiad lessons and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: In terms of teaching major, the most positive attitudes were expressed by Geography (M=3.2800, SD=0.46834) and Mathematics (M=3.1145, SD=.59944) majors, while Technology (M=2.2667, SD=0.0) and Chemistry (M=2.4907, SD=0.72589) majors displayed the least positive opinions. Oneway analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare major areas including English, Biology, Ecology, Physics, Physical Culture, Chemistry, ICT, Literature, Mathematics, Social Studies, Russian Language, Technology and Geography. In the Table 4, the ANOVA results showed a significant difference in lesson major. (F=4.139, p<.05), H5 was accepted.
Table 4 Test of Significance of Teacher's opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiad and Lesson Major
Variables N Mean SD F p
Major English Biology Ecology Physics Physical Culture Chemistry 28 36 8 16 36 12 2.8024 2.7463 2.6056 3.0444 2.7975 2.4907 .33355 .70021 .31477 .50114 .74720 .72589 4.139 .000
ICT 24 2.9667 .27736
Literature Mathematics 4 112 2.7833 3.1145 .00000 .59944
Social Studies 48 2.9338 .49592
Russian Language Technology Geography Total 48 4 20 396 2.8380 2.2667 3.2800 2.9302 .22065 .00000 .46834 .55995
H6: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's educational qualification and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: ANOVA was performed (see Table 5) and no significant differences were found between teacher's educational qualification and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads (F=.341, p=.711). In terms of educational qualification, the mean values indicated that teacher who had PhD degree (M =2.96, SD=58) had a significantly more favourable opinion than those who had Master Degree (M=2.95, SD=.49) and Bachelor Degree (M=2.90, SD=.61). According to data result H6 was rejected.
Table 5: Test of Significance teacher's educational qualification and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads
Variables N Mean SD F P
Educational Qualification
Bachelor Degree 196 2.9069 .61510 .341 .711
Master Degree 180 2.9515 .49212
PhD Degree 20 2.9667 .58510
Total 396 2.9302 .55995
H7: There are statistically significant differences between location of school and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Teachers from urban district displayed the more positive opinion (M=3.08, SD=.78) than teachers from city districts (M=2.90, SD=.51). As shown in Table 6, the results p=.027 associated
with the test static (F=4.90) was smaller than alpha (.05). Therefore, statistically significant difference was found among the location of schools. Because of this analysis H7 was accepted.
_Table 6: Test of Significance between location of school and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads_
Variables_N_Mean_SD_F_P_
Location of School
City District 340 2.9050 .51028 4.90 .027
Urban District 56 3.0829 .78690
Total 396 2.9302 .55995
H8: There are statistically significant differences between teacher eLearning level and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Pearson r correlation coefficients were calculated to measure the relationship between teacher eLearning level (experience) and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. Correlation coefficients were calculated to address the 8th research question. As illustrated in Table 7, the correlation analysis indicated statistically significant relationships between teacher eLearning level and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. (r=.565, p=.000). Hence H8 was accepted.
Table 7: Test of Significance between teacher eLearning level and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads_
Variables Opinion about using eLearning in Science eLearning Skill
Olympiad scale Level Scale
Correlations
Opinion about using eLearning in Pearson 1 .565**
Science Olympiad scale Correlation
Sig.(2-tailed) .000
eLearning Skill Level Scale N 396 396
Pearson .565** 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 396 396
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
3. Conclusion of Research
H01: There are favourable opinions about using eLearning in Science Olympiad: The findings revealed that teachers generally reported a positive opinion toward using eLearning in Science Olympiad. The results showed that most of the participants either agreed or strongly agreed. These findings are also supported by researcher Alanazy (2011) who found that students showed a generally positive opinion toward learning in a coeducational online cooperative learning environment. These results are also in the line with the findings of Boura' (2009) who indicated that learners showed positive attitude toward online learning environment. A report by Chowdhury (2009) found that students generally report a positive overall attitude toward coeducational online cooperative learning. Parallel statements were also made in other studies (Harper, 2003; Nicolle, 2005).
H2: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's gender and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: This hypothesis was rejected on the basis of independent-sample t-test, which indicated no significant differences between teacher's gender and their opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. This result aligns with prior studies which noted gender as an insignificant factor (Bouras, 2009; Washington, 2009). However, this study contradicts results related to a research by Liaw and Huang (2011) who found gender difference are related to attitudes about eLearning. The findings contradicted previous literature on similar issues (Tung, 2007; Williams, 2006).
H3: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's years of experience and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Hypothesis 3 was rejected based on the results of one-way ANOVA which showed insignificant correlation between teacher's years of experience and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. Harvey-Buschel (2009) research showed no difference in technology integration between inexperienced and experienced teachers. In addition, Males (2011) study also indicated that there is no significant relationship between attitude toward technology and total years of teaching experience. This results aligns with the
findings of Gorder (2008) and Mueller, Wood, Willough, Ross, and Specht (2008). Nevertheless, this result was in conflict with the research done by Hew and Brush (2007) and study of Teo (2009), which found years of experience major played a significant role in teachers attitude toward online learning environments.
H4: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's age and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Hypothesis 4 was rejected based on the results of one-way ANOVA which showed insignificance correlation between teacher's age and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. This result aligns with the findings of Alanazy (2011). According to Alanazy (2011) all age groups showed a favourable attitude toward online cooperative learning. Additionally, Alajmi (2010) declared that younger and older faculty members shared almost similar attitude toward eLearning; there was no statistical significance between faculty members attitudes or skills and their ages. The result of this study are also supported by Tung (2007).
H5: There are statistically significant differences between Science Olympiad lessons and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Hypothesis 5 was accepted based on the results of one-way ANOVA which showed significant relationship between Science Olympiad lessons and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. This result confirms the results of Gottschall (2006) that showed a significant correlation between a student's major and attitude toward coeducational online cooperative learning. However, this result is in conflict with the Alanazy (2011) who found no major differences between student attitudes based on their academic major.
H6: There are statistically significant differences between teacher's educational qualification and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Hypothesis 5 was rejected based on the results of one-way ANOVA which reflected insignificant between teacher's educational qualification and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. The result confirms the result of Gorder (2008) which showed no significant relationship between technology integration and a teacher's education qualification. However, Males (2011) study contradicts this researcher's study that qualification showed significantly differences.
H7: There are statistically significant differences between location of school and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads:: This hypothesis was accepted on the basis of ANOVA, which indicated significant differences between location of school and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. The result was in the line with findings of Rayle (2011) which indicated that there were significant interactions between the enrolment and locale of the principal's school and the of effectiveness of online learning.
H8: There are statistically significant differences between teacher eLearning level and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads: Hypothesis 8 was accepted based on the results of Pearson r correlation coefficients which reflected significant differences between teacher eLearning level and opinion about using eLearning in Science Olympiads. This result aligns with prior study which showed experience in using technology as a significant factor for improving their teaching in the classroom (Chowdhury, 2009).
This study provided an investigation of teacher's use of eLearning in science Olympiad in Russian schools. In this study, teachers agreed that use of eLearning in Science Olympiad is useful and appropriate. This research concluded that Teachers generally have a positive attitude toward using eLearning in science Olympiad. It concludes that teachers feel that there are important advantages to using eLearning in Science Olympiad. Based on these finding, this researcher created a website for providing extensive resources on selected lesson useful for augmenting the training for Science Olympiad. Aim of this new website is to supports Science Olympiad instructors to start using eLearning in their Science Olympiad related work.
References
Abrami, C. (2006). A review of eLearning in Canada: a rough sketch of the evidence, gaps and promising directions. Canadian Journal of
Learning and Technology, 23. Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/27 Al-Qahtani, A. A. Y., & Higgins, S. E. (2012). Effects of traditional, blended and eLearning on students' achievement in higher education.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, n/a-n/a. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00490.x
Alajmi, M. (2010). Faculty members' readiness for eLearning in the college of basic education in Kuwait. Ph.D. 3448603, University of North Texas, United States -- Texas. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/860122564?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database.
Alanazy, S. M. (2011). Saudi students' attitudes, beliefs, and preferences toward coeducational online cooperative learning. 3445199 Ph.D., Wayne State University, United States -- Michigan. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/860773817?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Armstrong, D. (2010). A qualitative study of undergraduate students' approaches, perceptions, and use of online tools. 3416992 Ed.D., University of San Francisco, United States -- California. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/742477661?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Baisheva, M. (2004). Improving the methods ofpreparing students for olympiads in mathematics: the example of 3-5 classes., Russian Education Academy, Moscow. Retrieved from http://www.dissercat.com/content/sovershenstvovanie-metodiki-podgotovki-uchashchikhsya-k-olimpiadam-po-matematike-na-primere-Bouras, C. S. (2009). Instructor and learner presence effects on student perceptions oof satisfaction and learning in the university online classroom. 3361795 Ed.D., Regent University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305135028?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Chowdhury, M. (2009). The relationship between ICT integration and improvement in teaching as perceived by college instructors. 3355030 Ph.D., Walden University, United States -- Minnesota. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305080719?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Dajani, N. N. (2009). Perceptions of Arab students, faculty members, and administrators at the American University in Cairo towards e-learning: An exploratory case study. Ph.D. 3341865, Capella University, United States -- Minnesota. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305160319?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database. Davis, S. M. (2001). What eLearning can learn from history. USDLA Journal, 15(10). Retrieved from
http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/0CT01_Issue/article01.html Gorder, L. M. (2008). A Study of Teacher Perceptions of Instructional Technology Integration in the Classroom. Wilson Web, 50(2), 63-76. Retrieved from
http://mollymckee.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/A%20Study%20oi%20Teacher%20Perceptions%20of%20Instructional%20Technology%20Int egration%20in%20the%20Classroom.pdf Gottschall, H. M. (2006). Faculty and student attitudes towards group work in higher education and why faculty use groups. 3232561 Ph.D., Indiana University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305336638?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Harper, S. M. (2003). A metaphorical analysis of teacher beliefs about using technology in the classroom. 3103202 Ph.D., Kent State University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305319111?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Harvey-Buschel, P. (2009). A quantitative examination of factors that impact technology integration in urban public secondary mathematics classrooms. 3365812 Ed.D., Bowie State University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/305156670?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Hennebury, L. E. (2007). Transfer of training: ELearning in a global Fortune 500 company. Ph.D. 3253619, Capella University, United States -Minnesota. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304723307?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database.
Hew, K., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future
research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. doi: 10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5 Kerry, J. D. (2012). Learning in 140 Characters: Teachers' Perceptions of Twitter for Professional Development. 3531637 Ed.D., University of Phoenix, United States -- Arizona. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1220692954?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Lebedev, 0. E. (2004). Competence-based approach in education. School Technology, 3-12.
Liaw, S.-S., & Huang, H.-M. (2011). A study of investigating learners attitudes toward e-learning. Paper presented at the 5th International
Conference on Distance Learning and Education, Singapore. Males, N. E. (2011). Uses and attitudes toward educational technology among new teachers in urban schools: A correlational study. 3468109 Ed.D., University of Phoenix, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/883382579?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database. Masrom, M. (2007). Technology acceptance model and eLearning Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on Education, Sultan
Hassanal Bolkiah Institute of Education,Universiti Brunei Darussalam. http://eprints.utm.my/5482/1/MaslinMasrom2006_Techn.pdf May, J. S. C. (2007). Learner characteristics and perceptions of success in online eLearning environments. MR38138 M.Ed., Nipissing University (Canada), Canada. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304759575?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Ministry of Development of Russia. (2013) Retrieved 13 March, 2013, from http://www.minregion.ru/urals/chelyabinsk/ Ministry of Education of Chelyabinsk. (2012). Публичный доклад Министерства образования и науки Челябинской области- 2012 год. Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willough, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration 51, 1523-1537. Retrieved from
http://www.wlu.ca/documents/31235/CAE1180_DFA_article_Mueller_et_al_2008.pdf Nagi, K., Firouz, A., & Suesawaluk, P. (2007). eLearning in Thailand - A Survey oof Social. Paper presented at the TENCON 2007 - 2007 IEEE Region 10 Conference, Bangkok.
Nicolle, P. S. (2005). Technology adoption into teaching and learning by mainstream university faculty: A mixed methodology study revealing the 'how, when, why, and why not'. 3184089 Ph.D., Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304988952?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Orly, M. (2007). Multicultural eLearning project and comparison of teachers', student teachers' and pupils' perceptions about e-learning.
Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 1(3), 178-191.
Podlesny, D. (2001). Methods of preparing and conducting physical contests in elementary school Russian Ph.D., Moscow Pyhsic and Technical University. Retrieved from http://www.dissercat.com/content/metodika-podgotovki-i-provedeniya-fizicheskikh-olimpiad-v-osnovnoi-shkole-rossii#ixzz2FiFx7uGk
Post, S. W. (2010). Modeling of stakeholders' perceptions and beliefs about eLearning technologies in serviceLearning practices. 3437380 Ph.D., TUI University, United States -- California. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/821459170?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Powell, A. (2011). A case study of ELearning initiatives in New Zealand's secondary schools. Ed.D. 3445071, Pepperdine University, United States -- California. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/860144333?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database.
Rayle, T. W. (2011). Principal perceptions about the implementation and effectiveness oof online learning in public high schools in Indiana.
3453915 Ph.D., Indiana State University, United States -- Indiana. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/868276685?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Sadovnichiy, V. (2012). Speech of russia rectors' union president. Moscow. Retrieved from http://rsr-online.ru/doc/norm/112.doc.
Schwirzke, K. L. (2011). Online learning in California K-12 schools: Status and perceptions oof administrators. 3515001 Ed.D., Argosy University/Phoenix, United States -- Arizona. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019055843?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Teo, T. (2009). Is there an attitude problem? Reconsidering the role of attitude in the TAM. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 1139-1141. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00913.x
Teo, T. (2011). Modeling the determinants of pre-service teachers' perceived usefulness of e-learning. Campus - Wide Information Systems, 28(2), 124-140.
Theodocion, K. E. (2012). Middle School Educators' Perceptions oof Online Professional Development 3512074 Ed.D., Walden University, United States -- Minnesota. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1023811625?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Tihomirov, V. (2012). eLearning in the developed and developing countries. Paper presented at the Smart ELearning in Russia.
Tung, C. K. (2007). Perceptions of students and instructors of online and Web-enhanced course effectiveness in community colleges. 3284232 Ph.D., University of Kansas, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304861422?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Vyshnepolsky, V. (2000). Methodological basis of training and the competition for graphic disciplines in higher education. Moscow Pedagocical State University, Moscow. Retrieved from http://www.dissercat.com/content/metodicheskie-osnovy-podgotovki-i-provedeniya-olimpiad-po-graficheskim-distsiplinam-v-vysshe
Washington, D. W. (2009). An investigation of faculty's perceptions oof traditional and on-line instruction at post-secondary institutions in North Carolina. 3406572 Ed.D., Fayetteville State University, United States -- North Carolina. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305161269?accountid=15958 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
Williams, J. H. (2006). Going the distance: Community college faculty attitudes toward distance learning. 3216244 Ed.D., Morgan State University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304952227?accountid=8401 ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text database.
