i-manager Publications

Dynamic Neuroscientific Systemology: Using Tri–Squared Meta–Analysis and Innovative Instructional Design to Develop a Novel Distance Education Model for the Systemic Creation of Engaging Online Learning Environments

James Edward Osler II*, Mark Anthony Wright**

*_** North Carolina Central University, USA.

Periodicity:July - September'2015
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.12.2.3614

Abstract

The purpose of this research investigation was to look at the factors that lead to isolation, lack of student inspiration and motivation, lack of student engagement and lack of student retention in the asynchronous online learning environment. The study further delves into how the use of cognitive and neuroscience research can inform the design of an interactive user interface model to address the aforementioned factors. The instrument used in this study was researcher designed “Tri–Squared Test Inventive Investigative Instrument” (Osler, 2012). The data was analyzed using the novel Tri–Squared Meta–Analysis methodology. The results yielded significant differences in the Tri–Squared Meta–Analysis regarding the research literature as it relates to the overall use of cognitive science, neuroscience, and the science of design to increase the overall effectiveness of distance education in terms of course design based upon neuroscientific graphic user interface concepts and principles. This illustrates that there is a clear lack of relevant research regarding the use of cognitive science, neuroscience, and the science of design to truly create effective and engaging distance education online courses

Keywords

Analytics, Asynchronous, Brain-Based Learning, Cognition, Cognitive Science, Distance Education, Educational Science, Instrument, Investigation, Instructional Design, Learning Science, Mathematical Model, Neurobiology, Neuroeducation, Neurolaw, Neuroscience, Neuroplasticity, Online Learning, Outcomes, Research, Static Test, Statistics,Synchronous, Trichotomy, Tri–Squared, Tri-Squared Meta–Analysis, Tri–Squared Test.

How to Cite this Article?

Osler, J. E., II. and Wright , M .A.(2015). Dynamic Neuroscientific Systemology: Using Tri–Squared Meta–Analysis and Innovative Instructional Design to Develop a Novel Distance Education Model for the Systemic Creation of Engaging Online Learning Environments. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.12.2.3614

References

[1]. Abbott, L. F., & Dayan, P. (2001). “Theoretical Neuroscience. Computational and Mathematical Modeling of Neural Systems”. Computational Neuroscience series, Vol.15.

[2]. Abdous, M. (2013). “Toward an Alternative Learning Environment Interface for Learning Management Systems”. International Journal on E-Learning, Vol. 12(1), pp.5-22. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

[3]. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). “Learning on demand: Online education in the United States”, 2009.

[4]. Ansari, D. & Coch, D. (2006). “Bridges over troubled waters: Education and cognitive neuroscience”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences (Elsevier Science), Vol. 10(4), pp.146-151.

[5]. Apostol, T. M. (1967). Calculus, second edition, Volume one: “One–variable calculus, with an introduction to linear algebra”. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell.

[6]. Beck, V. S. (2010). “Comparing online and face-toface teaching and learning”. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, Vol. 21(3), pp. 95-108.

[7]. Boling, E. C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2012). “Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experience”. Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 15(2), pp. 118-125.

[8]. Briggs, S. (2013). Neuroeducation: 25 Findings Over 25 Years [web log post]

[9]. Buckminster Fuller Institute [BFI] (2014). Design Science.

[10]. CEMCA - Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia, (2014). Instructional design for multimedia.

[11]. Centre for Theoretical Neuroscience [CTN] 2014. Theoretical Neuroscience.

[12]. Clark, C., (2012). “Student growth in asynchronous online environments: Learning styles and cognitive development”.

[13]. Cognitive Science Society. (2014).

[14]. Crawford-Ferre, H., & Wiest, L. R. (2012). Effective Online Instruction in Higher Education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, Vol.13(1), pp.11-14.

[15]. Feidakis, M., & Daradoumis, T. (2013). “A Framework for Designing Computer Supported Learning Systems with Sensibility”. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), Vol. 9(1), pp. 57-70.

[16]. Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., Keller, J. M., & Russell, J. D. (2004). Principles of instructional design, 4thed.

[17]. Greeer, S. L. (2010). “Plasticity: The online learning environment's potential to support varied learning styles and approaches”, Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol 27, Iss:4, pp.254-262.

[18]. Hardiman, M., Rinne, L., Gregory, E., & Yarmolinskaya, J. (2012). “Neuroethics, neuroeducation, and classroom teaching: Where the brain sciences meet pedagogy”. Neuroethics, Vol. 5(2), pp.135-143.

[19]. Hu, D., & Potter, K. (2012, April 1). “Designing an effective online learning environment”. Southeast Education Network, Vol.16, pp.2.

[20]. Jaggars, S. S., Edgecombe, N., & Stacey, G. W., (2013). “Creating an effective online environment : Why might students perform more poorly online?” Community College Research Center, Columbia University.

[21]. Jensen, E. (2000). “What is Brain-Based Learning?”

[22]. Kant, I. (2007). “Critique of pure reason (based on Max Müller's translation)”. P. Classics a Division of Pearson PLC. New York, NY.

[23]. Kumar, L., & Yap, K. C. (2010). Brain-based education: Its pedagogical implications and research relevance. imanager's Journal on Educational Psychology, Vol. 4(2), pp. 1-5.

[24]. Mahan, J. D., & Stein, D. S., (2014, July). “Teaching Adults—Best Practices that Leverage the Emerging Understanding of the Neurobiology of Learning”, Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care, Vol. 44, Issue 6, Pages 141-149, ISSN 1538-5442.

[25]. Medina, J. (2008). Brain rules: 12 principles for surviving and thriving at work, home, and school. Seattle, WA: Pear Press .

[26]. Nordqvist, C. (2012, November 27). “What is neuroscience?” Medical News Today.

[27]. Osler, J. E. (2012). Trichotomy–Squared – A novel mixed methods test and research procedure designed to analyze, transform, and compare qualitative and quantitative data for education scientists who are administrators, practitioners, teachers, and technologists. imanager’s Journal on Mathematics, Vol. 1 (3), pp. 23–31.

[28]. Osler, J. E. (2013a). The Psychometrics of Educational Science: Designing Trichotomous Inventive Investigative Instruments for Qualitative and Quantitative for Inquiry. imanager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, Vol. 8 (3), pp. 15–22.

[29]. Osler, J. E. (2013b). The Psychological Efficacy of Education as a Science through Personal, Professional, and Contextual Inquiry of the Affective Learning Domain. imanager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, Vol ,6 (4), pp. 36–41.

[30]. Osler, J. E. (2013c). Algorithmic Triangulation Metrics for Innovative Data Transformation: Defining the Application Process of the Tri–Squared Test. i-manager’s Journal on Mathematics, Vol ,2 (2), pp. 10–16.

[31]. O'Toole, S., & Keating, G. (2011). “What makes a good eLearning program?” Training & Development In Australia, Vol. 38(5), pp. 030-032.

[32]. Park, J. Y. (2011). “Design Education Online: Learning Delivery and Evaluation”. International Journal of Art & Design Education, Vol.30(2), pp.176-187.

[33]. Reiser, R. A. (2001). “A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design”. Educational Technology, Research and Development, Vol. 49(2), pp.57.

[34]. Restak, R., (2011). Optimizing brain fitness. Chantilly, Virginia: The Teaching Company.

[35]. Rock, D. (2008). “SCARF: A brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others” . NeuroLeadership Journal.

[36]. Russo, K. E. (2012). “An instructional design theoretical framework for iStudents”. (Order No. 3540470, Capella University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 116.

[37]. Rust, J. &Golombok, S. (1989). Modern Psychometrics: The Science of Psychological Assessment (2nd ed.). Florence, KY, US: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.

[38]. Searls, D. B. (2012). “Ten simple rules for online learning”. PLoS Computational Biology, 8(9), e1002631.

[39]. Singh, S. (1997). “Fermat's enigma: The epic quest to solve the world's greatest mathematical problem”. A. Books a Division of Random House. New York, NY.

[40]. Sprenger, Marilee (2010). Brain-Based Teaching in the Digital Age. : Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD), pp.16.

[41]. Thagard, P. (ed.) (2007). Philosophy of Psychology and Cognitive Science. North-Holland.

[42]. UNCC-CSP. (2014). Cognitive Science.

[43]. UNSW School of Medicine (2012). What is neuroscience.

[44]. Vaishnavi, V. &Kuechler, W. (2004). “Design Science Research in Information Systems,” January 20, 2004; last updated: October 23, 2013.

[45]. Wijekumar, K. (2005). “Creating Effective Web-Based Learning Environments: Relevant Research and Practice”. Journal of Online Education, Vol.1(5).

[46]. Wolfe, P. (2010). Neuroeducation.

Dynamic Neuroscientific Systemology: Using Tri–Squared Meta–Analysis and Innovative Instructional Design to Develop a Novel Distance Education Model for the Systemic Creation of Engaging Online Learning Environments

Abstract

Keywords

How to Cite this Article?

References

If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Options for accessing this content:

	North Americas,UK, Middle East,Europe		India	Rest of world
	USD	EUR	INR	USD-ROW
Pdf	35	35	200	20
Online	35	35	200	15
Pdf & Online	35	35	400	25