| Literature DB >> 34975646 |
Mǎdǎlina Dana Rucsanda1, Alexandra Belibou1, Ana-Maria Cazan2.
Abstract
Given the current pandemic context generated by COVID 19, important changes in the way specific subjects to music education are taught emerged, affecting not only the particularities of learning and teaching in individual courses, but also the other courses regarding group learning or theoretical subjects. In this time, emergency remote teaching and learning requires cross-collaboration between instructional, content, and technological teams. Our research examines the students' attitudes toward online education, also presenting proposals for optimization and efficiency. The research was undertaken after an experience of a University semester in a lockdown context, and it aimed at undergraduate and master's degree students from music faculties in Romania. An important result was the mediating role of perceived utility of e-learning methods, perceived utility mediated the associations between compatibility of online methods and satisfaction toward the use of e-learning methods. The perceived compatibility of e-Learning methods with online music education led to a higher perceived utility which, in turn, predicted a higher satisfaction toward e-Learning Although this period accentuated the fear of interaction with others, the anxiety related to the unknown, the intolerance of uncertainty did not predict the satisfaction toward the use of e-learning platforms. In conclusion, more educational initiatives are needed to promote remote teaching methods in music education. In the absence of similar research in our country, we considered that future research on this topic is needed.Entities:
Keywords: intolerance of uncertainty; music e-learning; perceived utility; remote teaching; satisfaction toward online learning and teaching
Year: 2021 PMID: 34975646 PMCID: PMC8718452 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.753785
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Differences between the perceived characteristics of online learning methods in different contexts and between the amounts of time dedicated to study for the three different contexts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Perceived utility | Individual—group | 3.09 (1.38) | 2.57 (1.42) | 0.51 | 61.38 | 0.21 |
| Individual—theoretical | 3.09 (1.38) | 3.34 (1.27) | −0.25 | |||
| Group—theoretical | 2.57 (1.42) | 3.34 (1.27) | −0.76 | |||
| Compatibility | Individual—group | 2.43 (1.30) | 2.19 (1.18) | 0.24 | 134.25 | 0.33 |
| Individual—theoretical | 2.43 (1.30) | 3.18 (1.28) | −0.74 | |||
| Group—theoretical | 2.19 (1.18) | 3.18 (1.28) | −0.98 | |||
|
| ||||||
| Individual | Before—During | 3.48 (1.54) | 3.52 (1.27) | −0.04 | 0.15 | 0.001 |
| Group | Before—During | 2.94 (1.49) | 2.95 (1.54) | −0.005 | 0.002 | <0.001 |
| Theoretical | Before—During | 2.56 (1.25) | 2.65 (1.44) | −0.08 | 1.14 | 0.005 |
F: Repeated measures ANOVA, η2: Eta squared,
p < 0.001, N = 220.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.
Pearson correlation coefficients between tolerance of uncertainty, perceived utility, and attitudes toward online learning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Prospective anxiety | 1 | ||||||||
| 2 Inhibitory anxiety | 0.867 | 1 | |||||||
| 3 Perceived positive utility | −0.122 | −0.079 | 1 | ||||||
| 4 Perceived negative utility | 0.366 | 0.334 | −0.393 | 1 | |||||
| 5 Negative attitudes | 0.407 | 0.347 | −0.387 | 0.613 | 1 | ||||
| 6 Positive attitudes | −0.110 | −0.109 | 0.609 | −0.254 | −0.353 | 1 | |||
| 7 Time spent online | −0.088 | −0.061 | 0.023 | −0.008 | −0.003 | −0.029 | 1 | ||
| 8 Compatibility | −0.115 | −0.116 | 0.584 | −0.397 | −0.422 | 0.544 | −0.055 | 1 | |
| 9 Satisfaction | −0.174 | −0.158 | 0.436 | −0.359 | −0.320 | 0.248 | 0.133 | 0.415 | 1 |
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001, N = 220.
Figure 1Mediation model for the prediction of satisfaction toward the use of e-learning methods and platforms (*p < 0.05 ***p < 0.001). → Direct effect ⤏ Indirect effect.
Path estimates and explained variance for the satisfaction to use online methods.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Predicting perceived utility | 0.35 | ||
| Compatibility of online methods | 0.59 | <0.001 | |
| Time spent online | 0.05 | 0.318 | |
| Predicting satisfaction toward the use of e–Learning methods | 0.25 | ||
| Perceived utility | 0.28 | <0.001 | |
| Compatibility of online methods | 0.25 | <0.001 | |
| Intolerance of uncertainty | −0.10 | 0.070 | |
| Time spent online | 0.13 | 0.023 | |
| Indirect effect of compatibility through Perceived utility | 0.16 | 0.011 | |
| Indirect effect time spent online through Perceived utility | 0.02 | 0.285 | |
N = 220.