Development and Management of an E-Learning Program in a Research and Learning Innovation Course: Achievement, Creativity, and a Comparison of Mathematics and English Preservice Teachers

Abstract

This research and development study developed and evaluated a managed e-learning program for a Research and Learning Innovation course and examined whether its core design was workable across two preservice-teacher majors. The study proceeded in three phases: synthesis of the knowledge base, program development and expert validation, and field implementation. The resulting 10-module program integrated e-learning and Google Classroom with individual practice, collaborative learning, product monitoring, and feedback over 15 weeks. Cluster sampling from six intact classes yielded 59 participants: 30 mathematics majors and 29 English majors. Instruments comprised the program and manual, an 80-item achievement test, a 40-item creativity scale, and a 45-item satisfaction questionnaire. Four experts returned the program evaluation; item-objective congruence indices ranged from .75 to 1.00. The efficiency/effectiveness results were 96.67/90.58 and an effectiveness index of .711 for mathematics, and 96.90/91.47 and .750 for English. Posttest achievement exceeded pretest achievement with very large within-group effects for mathematics, t(29) = 16.32, p < .001, dz = 2.98, and English, t(28) = 15.57, p < .001, dz = 2.89. At the two-week follow-up, mathematics scores were maintained, whereas English scores declined slightly; the latter met the .05 but not the prespecified .01 criterion. Overall creativity was excellent (M = 6.09, SD = 1.00), although 0.06 below the 6.15 target, and satisfaction was at the highest level (M = 4.64, SD = 0.51). No between-major differences were detected for posttest score, gain, creativity, or satisfaction (p > .05), with trivial-to-small effects. The findings support the feasibility of a common management core across the two studied contexts and yield a Research-to-Innovation Learning Cycle that links practice-based learning, four-stage rubric monitoring, and continuous quality improvement. Longer-term creativity and product use require follow-up.