Online Learning Efficacy Research Database

Designing a hybrid course entails the challenge of choosing learning activities for each of the face-to-face and online environments--and sequencing and coordinating the activities across the two environments--to promote student attainment of the course’s learning objectives. This paper presents a study comparing student performance in an undergraduate Principles of Microeconomics course taught by the same instructor under hybrid (n = 51) and face-to-face (n = 24) delivery. The percentage of hybrid students completing the course (71%) was not significantly different (chi-square = .61, p = .433) than that (79%) of the face-to-face students. A regression analysis controlling for student GPA indicated that, for students completing the course, the composite test score was, on average, an estimated 4.8 percentage points lower (p = .025, one-tailed) under hybrid delivery than under face-to-face delivery. Student GPA had a strong positive ceteris paribus impact (p = .000, one-tailed) on the composite test score. The finding of a lower level of student learning under hybrid relative to face-to-face delivery is attributed to inattentiveness to pedagogical principles in designing the hybrid course. The study serves as a caution to colleges and universities initiating or expanding their hybrid course offerings in the absence of faculty training or quality control checks. The paper closes with suggestions for further research. 
[less]

Using a large administrative dataset from a statewide system including 34 community and technical colleges, the authors employed an instrumental variable technique to estimate the impact of online versus face-to-face course delivery on student course performance. The travel distance between each student's home and college campus served as an instrument for the likelihood of enrolling in an online section of a given course. In addition, college-by-course fixed effects controlled for within- and between-course selection bias. Analyses yield robust negative estimates for online learning in terms of both course persistence and course grade, contradicting the notion that there is no significant difference between online and face-to-face student outcomes—at least within the community college setting. Accordingly, both two-year and four-year colleges may wish to focus on evaluating and improving the quality of online coursework before engaging in further expansions of online learning. 
[less]

The purpose of this study was to examine students' academic self-concept and social presence in face-to-face (FTF) and online version of the same course, and to examine the effects of these two variables on student learning achievement and satisfaction. A total of 257 undergraduate students enrolled in a digital design course were randomly assigned to either of two treatments: one offered FTF instruction, and the other offered online instruction. Individual students' academic self-concept, social presence and attitudes towards course were measured by widely-recognized and reliable scales respectively. Results indicated that both academic self-concept and social presence are important factors that are closely related to students' learning achievement and satisfaction, but they are not equally important. FTF students perceived significantly higher social presence than online students; while no significant difference was found on academic self-concept. The effect of social presence on student learning achievement and satisfaction were stronger in online environment than in FTF environment. There was no significant difference between FTF and online students with regard to the effect of academic self-concept on learning achievement and satisfaction. These findings indicate that compared to FTF students, online students are in greater need of higher-level social presence, which has a strong effect on their learning achievement and satisfaction. Academic self-concept is equally important to both FTF and online students. Online students might need more supports on social interaction rather than self-reflection. 
[less]

The study investigated the effectiveness of Blended Learning environment in a comparison to Distance Learning environment with regard to learners' achievement as measured by exam scores on ‘Lesson Planning Section’, Methodology Course. The participants were (30) EFL female learners enrolled in two groups: The control group composed of (15) students who were exposed to distance learning only, whereas the experimental group consisted of (15) students who were exposed to blended learning. The results of the study indicated significant differences between the two groups on the achievement test in favour of the experimental group. 
[less]

The objective of this article is to report differences we have found in teaching “American National Government” via the web and in a traditional lecture/discussion format. Since beginning this quasiexperimental field study in late 1997, we have gathered a variety of comparative data concerning students' characteristics and their changes in political knowledge and attitudes—things that are important to all of us who labor teaching American government in hopes of nurturing healthy citizens. 
[less]

Distance learning has become more popular in recent years. Due to concern about the quality of web-based courses, the purpose of this study was to explore the differences in web-based versus land-based courses. In this study, the researcher compares web-based and land-based education courses to explore the strengths and weaknesses of each type of course. Overall, the average grades were similar but web-based was the more popular format. Land-based courses had a higher retention rate for students. 
[less]

This study investigated the effect of blended learning on novices’ understandings of the introductory programming. A quasi-experimental design with participants of preservice computer and instructional technologies teachers, one control group (CG, N =64) and one experimental group (EG, N=61) who received the course 11 weeks. While face-to-face courses were taught face-to-face in classroom and in lab, blended courses were conducted in synchronous and asynchronous settings and also in lab sessions. The pretest, posttest and delayed tests were used to collect data. The participants in two groups were separated into three categories (poor, average and good) according to the pretest results. The results of the study showed that blended and face-to-face courses have statistically similar effects on academic achievements among the three categories. However the delayed test results showed that, face-to-face courses were more effective on permanence than blended courses. Thus, considering the main goal of the introductory programming courses as enhancing students in the second category progress into the third, the organization of blended courses had to be revisited. Nevertheless, this study supported the idea that “Crucial challenges may exist on teaching some subjects via blended learning, which include intensive cognitive processes and some new approaches are needed to enhance permanence”. 
[less]

This study uses a quasi-experimental design to assess differences in student performance and satisfaction across online and face-to-face (F2F) classroom settings. Data were collected from 368 students enrolled in three online and three F2F sections of an introductory-level sociology course. The instructor, course materials, and assessments were consistent between the two delivery formats. The investigators compare student satisfaction and student performance on midterm exams and an integrating data analysis assignment. Ordinary least squares regression is used to evaluate the effect of the different course settings, independent of a number of demographic and control variables. Results indicate that differences in student performance between the two settings may be accounted for by the presence of a selection effect and that student satisfaction does not significantly differ across the two settings. These findings are interpreted to mean that when online courses are designed using pedagogically sound practices, they may provide equally effective learning environments. 
[less]

Much of the existing research in distance education has focused on contrasting the outcomes between traditional face-to-face teaching and purely online courses, in which the entire course content is delivered online. However, research has not examined the effectiveness of hybrid-online courses, in which a combination of online delivery and face-to-face classroom teaching is used, especially in the context of marketing courses. This paper examines student experiences and learning outcomes in purely online and hybrid-online course formats. For both formats, student satisfaction is found to be affected by the course content, student-teacher communications, the use of effective learning tools, and the instructor. Improvements in perceived learning and course performance scores are observed for the hybrid-online format in the context of a qualitative marketing course while no such benefits are observed for a technical marketing course. The results indicate that the merits of different distance learning approaches need to be evaluated in the specific context of each course and that the benefits of integrating face-to-face meetings into online marketing courses are course specific. 
[less]

This study compares student perceptions, learning behaviours and success in online and face-to-face versions of a Principles of Microeconomics course. It follows a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) approach by using a cycle of empirical analysis, reflection and action to improve the learning experience for students. The online course design involves 58 interactive narrated online modules, interactive online quizzes and biweekly online meetings with the instructor via video and voice-over-IP technology. Findings indicate that schedule flexibility motivates students to choose the online course format. Students in both learning environments felt they had high-quality communication with the instructor, while online students indicated limited peer-to-peer communication. Online students report studying more at home than face-to-face students, but not enough to compensate for the time face-to-face students spend in class. Reflecting on the findings, the authors suggest actions to improve the online course experience. 
[less]