Academia.eduAcademia.edu
European Journal of Social Sciences Studies ISSN: 2501-8590 ISSN-L: 2501-8590 Available on-line at: http://www.oapub.org/soc 10.5281/zenodo.57414 Volume 1│Issue 1│2016 COMPARISON OF VIDEO CONFERENCE AND FACE TO FACE MENTORING SERVICES ON ADVISEES’ ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS Necmi Esgi Assoc. Prof. Dr., Faculty of Education, Department of Computer and Instructional Technologies Education Gazi Osman Pasa University, Turkey email: necmiesgi@gmail.com Abstract: The aim of the research is to compare the impacts of mentoring services, delivered face to face and video conference on advisees’ academic achievements. Mentoring services, made up with two different instruments, were administered to a group of advisees, composed of 32 university students. In the research, the multiple-choice achievement test, which consisted of thirty, 5-point Likert items, was utilized in order to determine advisees’ academic achievements. Keywords: mentoring, face to face, video conference, advisee, academic achievements Introduction Mentoring is defined in general as maximizing individuals’ learning potentials, improving their skills, increasing their performances, and supporting and encouraging them to become the person they want to be. Adams and Crews (2004) indicate that telementoring is the electronic version of mentoring. Single & Muller (1999) define telementoring as a relationship between a more senior individual (mentor) and a lesser skilled or experienced individual (advisee) primarily using electronic communications, and that is intended to grow the skills, knowledge, confidence and cultural understanding of the advisee to help him or her to succeed. O’Neill 000 , on the other hand, defines telementoring as the use of telecommunication technologies to support a mentoring relationship when a face-to-face relationship would be impractical. Mentoring is conducted in two categories (Dorman, 2001; American School Health Association, 2001; Hansman, 2002, Perez and Dorman, 2001) as face to face and teleCopyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved Published by Open Access Publishing Group ©2015. 97 Necmi Esgi – COMPARISON OF VIDEO CONFERENCE AND FACE TO FACE MENTORING SERVICES ON “DVISEES’ “C“DEMIC “CHIEVEMENTS mentoring in which using advanced technology. The aim of the research is the comparison of the impacts of two different mentoring practices on student achievement which are formed on the basis of face to face and video conferencing. Method, data collection tools The advisee group of the research consists of 32 students who take the course Instructional design . The first group, where face to face advising was used between the advisee and the mentor, is composed of 16 students; the second group where video conference was used is composed of 16 students. Students in these groups received mentoring service in addition to their ordinary education. Necessary information was given to the mentors prior to the research about the content and the subject of the research, and the things that need to be done throughout the research. Mentoring services were performed for four weeks. The validity and reliability studies of the achievement test of the research were conducted in line with the evidence obtained from Trochim (2001) and Miles and Huberman (1994). The achievement test was prepared with 5-point Likert scale and consists of 0 items. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is.88. Upon completion of the training and participation, the achievement test was applied to the groups as the final test. Findings Comparison of the achievement scores taken from pre-test: Table 1 demonstrates the Mann-Whitney U. test results of the scores taken from Pretest be the groups, in which different mentoring instruments are used. Table 1: Mann-Whitney U. test results of the scores taken from Pretest be the groups 2 Groups n Mean Rank Group 1st 14 23,38 Group 2nd 18 24,19 x 4,54 p ,32 Mann-Whitney U test analysis results demonstrated in Table 1 indicate that there is not any significant difference between the achievement scores taken in the Pretest; by the 1st group where face to face advising , by the 2nd group where video conference, was used: European Journal of Social Sciences Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 1 │ 2016 98 Necmi Esgi – COMPARISON OF VIDEO CONFERENCE AND FACE TO FACE MENTORING SERVICES ON “DVISEES’ “C“DEMIC “CHIEVEMENTS 2 [( x ) =,32, p>.05]. Comparison of the achievement scores taken from post-test: Table 2 demonstrates the Mann-Whitney U. test results of the scores taken from post-test be the groups, in which different mentoring instruments are used. Table 2: Mann-Whitney U. test results of the scores taken from Posttest be the groups 2 Groups n Mean Rank Group1st 14 28,81 Group2 18 27,44 nd x 5,58 p .36 Mann-Whitney U test analysis results demonstrated in Table 2 indicate that there is not any significant difference between the achievement scores taken in the Posttest; by the 1st group where face to face advising , by the 2nd group where video conference, was used: 2 [( x ) =,36, p>.05] Despite several limitations such as low number of students in study groups, the subject worked on, and limited mentoring durations, research findings demonstrate that advisee achievement does not differ significantly according to whether the mentoring services are provided through video conference and face to face. Conclusion Findings of the current study, despite its limitations, demonstrate that mentoring services created by using video conferencing and face to face advising do not significantly differentiate advisees’ academic achievement. The reason no significant difference was found between research groups in terms of academic achievement might be the fact that all instruments have the same communicational impact on achievement; no matter they are used over the media or face to face. European Journal of Social Sciences Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 1 │ 2016 99 Necmi Esgi – COMPARISON OF VIDEO CONFERENCE AND FACE TO FACE MENTORING SERVICES ON “DVISEES’ “C“DEMIC “CHIEVEMENTS References Adams, G. and Crews, T.B. (2004) Telementoring: A Viable Tool Journal of Applied Research for Business Instruction Volume 2, Issue 3.1-6. American School Health Association. (2001). Enhancing youth achievement through telementoring. Journal of School Health, 71(3). 122-123. Dorman, S. M, (2001). Are Teachers Using Technology for Instruction?, Journal of School Health, 71(2).83-84. Harris, J. (Hansman, C. A. (2002) Critical Perspectives on Mentoring: Trend and Issues. www.calproonline.org/eric/docs/mott/mentoring5.pdf Retrieved October 18, 2010.1999). A descriptive study of telementoring among students, subject matter experts, and teachers: Message flow and function patterns. Journal of Researchon Computing in Education, 32 (1), 36-53. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd edn.), Sage: London & Thousand Oaks, California. O’Neill, D.K. and Scardamalia, M. supporting 000 Mentoring in the open: “ strategy for human development in the knowledge society .IKIT. http://ikit.org/fulltext/2000 _Mentoring.pdf Retrieved on October 15, 2010. Perez, S. & Dorman, S. M, (2001). Enhancing Youth Achievement Through Telementoring, Journal of School Health, 71(3): 122-123. Single, P. B. & Muller, C. B. (1999). Electronic mentoring: Issues to advance research and practice. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the International Mentoring Association. Atlanta, GA. Trochim,W. M. K. (2001) The Research Methods Knowledge Base, Cincinnati. OH. Atomicdogpublishing U.S.A. European Journal of Social Sciences Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 1 │ 2016 100 Necmi Esgi – COMPARISON OF VIDEO CONFERENCE AND FACE TO FACE MENTORING SERVICES ON “DVISEES’ “C“DEMIC “CHIEVEMENTS Creative Commons licensing terms Authors will retain copyright to their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Social Sciences Studies shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflict of interests, copyright violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated on the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). European Journal of Social Sciences Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 1 │ 2016 101