Biologiya ta’limida elektron ta’lim (E-Learning) va aralash ta’lim (Blended Learning) texnologiyalarining samaradorligini tahlil qilish
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17965348Ключевые слова:
elektron ta’lim, aralash ta’lim, metakognitiv ko‘nikmalar, biologiya ta’limi, raqamli platformalar, virtual laboratoriya, motivatsiya.Аннотация
Ushbu maqolada biologiya ta’limida elektron ta’lim (E-learning) va aralash ta’lim (Blended Learning) texnologiyalarining
ta’lim samaradorligiga ta’siri chuqur tahlil qilinadi. Tadqiqot jarayonida dizayn-o‘rganish yondashuvi,
kuzatuv, eksperimental guruhlar bilan solishtirma tahlil, metakognitiv ko‘nikmalarni aniqlovchi diagnostik vositalar va
o‘quv motivatsiyasi indeksidan foydalanildi. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatdiki, elektron ta’lim biologiya bo‘yicha vizual modellashtirish,
ilmiy jarayonlarni tushuntirish, murakkab mavzularni bosqichma-bosqich o‘zlashtirish hamda mustaqil o‘qish
ko‘nikmalarini shakllantirishda yuqori samara beradi. Aralash ta’lim esa o‘quvchilarning muloqot, tahlil, refleksiya, ijodiy
fikrlash va amaliy faoliyatini sezilarli darajada rivojlantiradi. Integratsiyalashgan raqamli ta’lim muhitlari ta’lim jarayonini
moslashuvchan, interaktiv va shaxsga yo‘naltirilgan qiladi
Библиографические ссылки
1. Ashraf, M. A. (2021). A systematic review of systematic reviews on blended learning. Journal of Educational Technology,
18(2), 45–60.
2. Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education.
The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.
3. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
4. Lin, Y. W., Tseng, H. W., & Chiang, P. J. (2017). The impact of blended learning on biology students’ performance and
cognitive development. Computers & Education, 103, 14–26.
5. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions.
The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
6. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22).
Springer.
7. Reeves, T. C. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In Educational design research (pp. 86–109).
Routledge.
8. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
19(4), 460–475.
9. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68–78.
10. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-Learning and the Science of Instruction (4th ed.). Wiley.
11. Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended
learning and technology use in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 3–33.
12. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning. The
Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8.
13. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.
14. PhET Interactive Simulations. University of Colorado Boulder. https://phet.colorado.edu/
15. Labster Virtual Biology Simulations. https://www.labster.com/
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2025 MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
